Be advised: this thread is not for serious in-depth discussion of weighty topics (we have a link for that), this thread is not for anything Culture War related. This thread is for Fun. You got jokes? Share 'em. You got silly questions? Ask 'em.
- 111
- 2
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
- Courtesy
- Content
- Engagement
- When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
- Proactively provide evidence in proportion to how partisan and inflammatory your claim might be.
- Accept temporary bans as a time-out, and don't attempt to rejoin the conversation until it's lifted.
- Don't attempt to build consensus or enforce ideological conformity.
- Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
- The Wildcard Rule
- The Metarule

Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Which is the most morally correct Inquisitor?
A bit of an odd/dumb thought experiment. Let us presuppose the following. You are in the 40k universe, and through the vagaries of fate have become a member of the Holy Ordos of His Majesty's Imperial Inquisition. You have the rosette, and with that rosette comes the authority to order the death of an entire world, and to consign a billion souls to oblivion. For the purposes of our thought experiment you are a true believer in the Imperium. It is the best, last hope for mankind and your job, your only job, is to push back the dying of the light by a decade, a year, a week, even just a day. To hold the line against the witch, the heretic, and the alien.
But which one is the most morally consistent with your internal value system as a man or woman who wholeheartedly supports the Imperium? The Ordo Xenos, Malleus, or Hereticus? Yes I'm aware that there are innumerable minor ordos, but work with me here and don't say "actually it's the Ordo Cronos." Does pursuit of the witch, the heretic, or the alien provide the greatest opportunity for pushing back the decay that besets the Imperium? There are of course excellent arguments for any of the options. The Alien is the most obvious threat. Unsubtle, overpowering, and always nibbling at the edges of Imperial space. The Tyranid breed xenos is an existential threat, and left unchecked it will consume the galaxy. But there are also countless other xenos threats, ranging from the major (Orks), to the relatively minor (Hrud). On the other hand, the heretic gnaws away at the fabric of the Imperium. Left unchecked they will fester and explode into rebellion, resulting in the deaths of millions or billions, and the diversion of hard-pressed Imperial resources away from the borders of Imperial space. On the third hand (insert genestealer joke here), the witch is the hardest to find and fight, while potentially representing the worst possible outcome. Too many witches go unchecked, and you risk letting a warp storm open in Imperial space, dragging countless human souls into literal hell where they will be murder/rape/tortured for eternity. Better to be eaten by Tyranids than dragged into the warp no?
I deliberately put this in the fun thread because I don't have a great answer, mostly because I can see the valid arguments for any of the above. Also because it's a silly thought experiment. But I'm curious as to what those mottizens who are familiar with the 40k universe think. Or if you're not familiar with the 40k universe, if anything jumps out as you as an obvious answer.
There is none. They are all mostly (in)competent, and Warhammer 40k makes a mockery of the meta-viewers moral ethics systems. Being a utilitarian in 40k is just as monstrous as a virtues-ethics or a wishy-washy moderate.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link