site banner
naraburns  nihil supernum  1yr ago (text post)   37992 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of March 27, 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.

11
Top Bottom New Old Controversial
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

He's had a litany of health issues, including a long, fraught struggle to lose and keep off weight. Much of it probably genetic, and I suspect related to his Ashkenazi heritage.

And it's doubtful he lives a truly healthy lifestyle, although its not like he does actively unhealthy things, just spends most of his time indoors, on the computer, and never challenges or improves himself physically.

And he's basically living through his own worst nightmare right now.

Come on man, like half of America's sexiest actors are at least part Ashkanazim (though we can suspect their less appealing producers are to praise for that ranking). I get that Jews-as-a-whole are traditionally not reputed to be hot or healthy people (in spite of having incredible longevity!), and Eliezer Shlomo Yudkowsky does match a certain Jewish male phenotype, but that's hardly the reason he's lame, fat and wears fedora with a sleeveless shirt in 2023.

That said: he doesn't strike me as substantially uglier than e.g. LeCun. Again, maybe I just have low standards, this time for looks of intellectuals.

There's also IDF, 170 thousand fit Jews, and they are not all Mizrahim.

The stereotype of Ashkenazic Jews is of thin people, possibly weak and/or sickly but definitely not overweight or obese.

When I looked it up, I found this Powerful Take of an chapter summary for Oxford Academic Publishing's Jews and Their Foodways:

Jews and Fat: Thoughts toward a History of an Image in the Second Age of Biology

This chapter discusses the stereotyping of Jews as a “diseased” race and argues that this is a result of their inherent obesity. In the 19th century, Jews were labelled as such because of their high rates of diabetes. Over and over again, it was the obesity of Jews that was seen as the cause of that particular illness. Jews are fat, and gross bodily appearance was seen as the avarice of the Jewish soul, and their aversion to work. Jews inherited their tendency toward obesity from the eating habits of their ancestors, and this in turn became a reflection of their innate character. Though their religious practice precludes them from consuming anything that is not kosher or clean, their obesity and diabetes seems to be an external sign of their hypocrisy.

I don't know what to make of it, but in this context it's funny for sure.

I'm simply making the point that he's got a heck of a grab-bag of buffs and nerfs thanks to his genetics, and has minmaxed himself pretty extensively.

He hasn't. He'd be far more effective were he not a sedentary lardass.

I doubt he gets enough physical activity. Seems firmly stuck in the dualist notion that soul is what does the thinking, hence body is irrelevant.

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