site banner
naraburns  nihil supernum  2yr ago (text post)   35507 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of March 6, 2023

This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.

Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.

We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:

  • Shaming.

  • Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.

  • Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.

  • Recruiting for a cause.

  • Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.

In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:

  • Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.

  • Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.

  • Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.

  • Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.

On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.

16
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I agree with everything you're saying and only get confused when you get to:

mutilate themselves

which is culturally and personally subjective value laden language-

and

Transpeople are creating chimeras and forcing others to respect that.

which sounds accurate, cool and based. Yes I just agree with this, and disagree with the values that seem to be getting laid onto it.

I do think the conversation has lost itself. The ultimate progression of the philosophy of morphological freedom, does not stop at trans people. It shouldn't even really start with gender. But the saturation of gender into society, the fact that it is one of the things we have made matter, has turned it into the central issue. Furthermore, the push to normalize the artistic (read, self expressive) flesh-crafting of the body has become combative. Too combative. Both in the sense that its created push-back and in the sense that it's been pushing an ideological conformity.

Still, I always feel a bit exasperated by these conversations. People are arguing whether people should be allowed to grow tits, and I'm still here in the year 3000 rolling my eyes and waiting for the public to take universal morphological freedom seriously as an ideal so I can become a velociraptor.

But if they expect others to pander to their however self-justified illusions

You're doing the thing again. I get it. You don't think their preferences should be respected. You think their identities are less legitimate than other forms of self identification.

And you don't want people to be forced to respect them, or be forced to do other things they don't want to.

That last line at least I emphasize with.

But as long as people need to eat to live and need respect to get the help of society to live fulfilling lives, people are going to keep finding ways to socially pressure one another to cooperate in building an amenable environment for them personally, nyaa.

I too, would appreciate a less coercive society. But that's not the world we live in. You can't actually live as a cat if everyone around you constantly mocks you for acting like a cat, nyaa.

But I get the impression that the crux of our disagreement here, is at the root of your value judgement, you are set on the idea that people shouldn't be respected for 'acting like a cat', nyaa. You want to be able to keep producing social pressure that reduces the number of people nyaa-ing in your vicinity.

It seems to me that some measure of culture war is inevitable here. Both sides poisoning the environment's ability to support the ideas they find harmful to their personal hopes and dreams.

You're doing the thing again. I get it. You don't think their preferences should be respected.

This is incorrect. I absolutely respect their preferences, which is why I'm not in favor of, say delegalizing sex reassignment surgeries. They're the ones not respecting other people's preferences, since they want to impose their worldview on others.

You said they expect others to pander to their self-justified illusions.

calling them self-justified illusions is value-loaded language. When you use that language it communicates the message that their identities aren't real, that you don't think a cat-identifying person should be allowed to expect others to treat them the way they want to be treated.

I do think the culture war has become overly totaling in this regard. Not everyone should have to respect everyone.

But it's reasonable to expect those who want to be close to you to respect you. And it's reasonable to want and fight for a society that respects you enough to not disadvantage you in the competition of capitalism.

And it's reasonable to want and fight for a society that respects you enough to not disadvantage you in the competition of capitalism.

No it isn't. I want to be treated like an aristocratic nobleman (a core part of my identity is believing in my own inherent superiority over others), living a life of artistic patronage and luxury while others serve me. Do you think it is reasonable for me to "want and fight for a society that respects you enough to not disadvantage you in the competition of capitalism" in this context?

That's reasonable in the sense that I can empathize with you fighting for your dream.

But by 'not disadvantage you in the competition of capitalism' I mean something along the lines of engendering an equitable meritocracy with a central focus on interest groups you are part of.

Engendering an equitable meritocracy is the thing I think most people will find reasonable and empathize with on priors, given our world, and your scenario is its explicit inverse in a way I think most people will not find reasonable.

You said they expect others to pander to their self-justified illusions.

That was someone else.

that you don't think a cat-identifying person should be allowed to expect others to treat them the way they want to be treated.

I agree with that, and I believe that does not imply I'm disrespecting their preferences. Your right to believe you're a cat ends at my right to not be forced to say "heeereee kitty, kitty, kitty!" when I see you. This applies to all other identities. Muslims don't have to recognize me as a Muslim, the Japanase don't have to recognize me as a Japanaese, etc.

That was someone else.

Ah, yes my bad.

Your right to believe you're a cat ends at my right to not be forced to say "heeereee kitty, kitty, kitty!" when I see you.

This is a bit too abstract to address. We definitely do put social and legal expectations on one another that compel us to do or not do things all the time. And sometimes we hit one another with serious consequences for these things.

Perhaps we could focus it a bit.

Perhaps we could focus it a bit.

I thought it was pretty focused? You gave the example of someone identifying as a cat. I added examples of someone identifying as a Muslim or Japanese without being accepted as one by these groups. If you don't like these comparison feel free to give another one, but I'd like that to be accompanied by an argument why the new analogy is better than the ones we already had.

More comments

Your right to believe you're a cat ends at my right to not be forced to say "heeereee kitty, kitty, kitty!" when I see you.

I think that proves too much. If society shames you for not saying hello or being polite, or calling a married woman Mrs or a Dr, Dr, they are forcing preferences upon you. There isn't any intrinsic reason this should stop any particular place. Society forces its preferences on you all the time, individuals can choose to buck the trend and then take the social consequences but most people will go along.

My right to believe I am a cat ends where I am able to persuade society it ends. Your right not to comply then ends where you don't want to take the social consequences. That's what the whole thing is about! (And of course vice versa, if you can persuade society I am not a cat then if I choose to continue acting as one, I will take the social consequences in return).

If you were able to persuade enough Japanese people to recognize you as Japanese such that they could successfully shame other Japanese people who did not, then at a societal level you ARE Japanese. You could go into Japanese only bars and so on.

It is at once a meaningful biological group and a malleable social group and it is possible to be in one or the other, both or neither.

Your right not to comply then ends where you don't want to take the social consequences. That's what the whole thing is about!

Yes, and I'm in the process of persuading society that there should be no consequences for this particular thing, Do you mind?

Would you like to participate in the conversation, or continue making the unrelated observation about the arbitrariness of social conventions?

More comments

calling them self-justified illusions is value-loaded language.

Not a problem. I frequently load my language with my own values, as a way of communicating those values to others.

When you use that language it communicates the message that their identities aren’t real,

Correct. Their identities are not real.

that you don’t think a cat-identifying person should be allowed to expect others to treat them the way they want to be treated.

Correct. They should have no such expectation.

Am I correct that you're a new name in this comment thread? Sometimes I lose track.

But yes. I fully expect people to load their language like this. I was somewhat confused for a moment when I believed the person I was responding to lacked self-awareness on the matter. In any case, the confusion was sorted out.

I think there is quite the conversation to be had on the nature of identity. Certainly it is not true to say "I am of the species Felis catus" but if I say "I am a sapient being who goes 'nyaa', and wears cat ears, and likes pets and scratches." then that is not an illusion. That's objectively correct, nyaa. I might even shorthand that to "I am a catboy."

Unless we want to go deeper, and speak of all identity as an illusion. Or we could have a whole conversation on what constitutes the cultural legitimacy of an identity.

Either way it seems overly simplistic to just say "Their identities are not real" and leave it there. There's just so much to say about identity.

Correct. They should have no such expectation.

Why not? I certainly expect it from all of my confidants and peers.

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats