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.
- 72
- 5
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 -
GPT-4 with the prompt "Write a typical post in the style of /r/themotte" (note: since the training set ostensibly stops in 2021, we're still pretending that the sub is on Reddit)
"Title: [Effortpost] The Perils of Polarization and How We Can Foster Constructive Dialogue
Body:
Hello /r/themotte,
Lately, I've been thinking about how political polarization has been increasing over the years, both in the United States and around the world. The increasing divide between different political ideologies and the subsequent vilification of the "opposing side" has led to a breakdown in rational discourse and understanding. In this post, I want to discuss the dangers of polarization, and how we might address it in order to foster more constructive dialogue.
The Perils of Polarization
Erosion of democratic values: Extreme polarization can result in the rejection of democratic norms and values, as each side becomes more focused on "winning" rather than maintaining a stable and fair political system. This has led to an increase in political violence, threats to free speech, and voter suppression.
Echo chambers: As people retreat to their respective political corners, they are more likely to only engage with like-minded individuals, leading to the development of echo chambers. This insulates people from different perspectives and reduces the opportunity for meaningful discussions that could bridge gaps in understanding.
Ineffective policy-making: Extreme polarization hampers effective policy-making, as each side becomes more interested in blocking the other's proposals than in working together to create well-rounded, practical solutions. This can result in political gridlock and, ultimately, a failure to address important societal issues.
Fostering Constructive Dialogue
Promoting empathy: In order to engage in productive conversations, we must first be willing to empathize with those who hold opposing views. By putting ourselves in their shoes, we can better understand their perspectives and find common ground.
Encouraging civil discourse: It's crucial to maintain a respectful tone when engaging in discussions, even when we vehemently disagree. Avoiding ad hominem attacks and focusing on the issues at hand can help prevent conversations from devolving into unproductive shouting matches.
Seeking diverse perspectives: Actively seeking out and engaging with diverse viewpoints can help us break free from our echo chambers and expose us to new ideas. This not only enriches our own understanding but also makes it easier to find common ground with others.
Promoting media literacy: A major contributing factor to polarization is the spread of misinformation and sensationalism in the media. Encouraging media literacy and critical thinking skills can help people better evaluate the veracity of claims and resist the lure of sensationalist, polarizing narratives.
In conclusion, the dangers posed by political polarization are very real, but there are steps we can take to mitigate its effects and promote more constructive dialogue. By recognizing our own biases, seeking diverse perspectives, and fostering empathy, we can work towards a more inclusive, rational, and effective political landscape.
I'm curious to hear your thoughts on this issue, and any other strategies you think might help bridge the divide. Let's have a respectful and fruitful discussion!"
How do you turn off the blandness? He's like an english student running for office in the motte on a progressive platform.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link