site banner
PaperclipPerfector  4mo ago (text post)   25987 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of January 8, 2024

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.

7
Top Bottom New Old Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I recently got more of an appreciation for the difficulty of material sciences because I was watching a YouTube channel of a chemist trying to make purple gold (a gold and aluminum alloy). https://youtube.com/watch?v=d6Pcp944sRI?si=DDwlYOfvMRViAWSk (warning: the video creator has some annoying conversational ticks, turns out of you want oddly detailed science videos you might not get the most charismatic presenters).

A good portion of the video is him trying to read and understand a paper and figure out what he should be doing for his process. But by the end of the video I think his video is a better presentation of what you need to make purple gold than the academic paper written on the topic.

This makes me think that the format of scientific papers is a bit outdated. I wonder how many questions in material sciences could be resolved by scientists just recording and talking through their experiments.

I know videos are sometimes now included with papers. I hope that trend continues.

Yeah, that sorta work is absolutely wonderful; while I find AppliedScience one of the easier people to watch, NileRed is a blast, and there's a small army of amateur scientists and researchers and builders. I've also definitely got a lot of sympathy for the 'science is hard' perspective, where even clear-cut stuff still depends on a lot of hard-to-define knowledge: the field as a whole has a lot of chicken-sexing. It's not even the difficulty distinguishing between replication failures because of those sort of problems, and where it's just made up, that gets me.

It's that there's often cases of clear jumping-up-and-down-admitted bad behavior with seemingly little serious personal impact, and only rare opportunity for actions within the existing and tremendously well-funded system to point it hidden bad behavior. Unfortunately, I don't think video (or prediction markets, as presented elsewhere in this thread) can really help with those issues.

This makes me think that the format of scientific papers is a bit outdated. I wonder how many questions in material sciences could be resolved by scientists just recording and talking through their experiments.

What makes you think it is outdated rather than having always required auxiliary books and papers to describe the processes involved?

There are a large amount of books by the name of "formulary" out of copyright that solve this very issue, so I think it is more that the format was never really meant to do that.

The life sciences have the Journal of Visualized Experiments. The problem is that most protocols have a plethora of minor details to be tweaked, so getting a protocol from the literature is often more of a first step than 'plug and play.'

I agree that formalized Scienceâ„¢ has really not caught up to technological possibilities.

Pictures? Diagrams? How quaint.

The closest to taking full advantage is the ML community, useful and novel technical work takes place in Discord servers by people with anime avatars, and you'll learn more from watching a v-tuber tweak hyperparameters and debug on a live stream than you will from the average textbook.

Before I even clicked, I knew this would either be NileRed or Action Lab 🤣

I've actually watched a ton of Action Lab as well. Damn that describes him as well.

I think I enjoy watching action lab a little more since its a bit more scripted and end result oriented. But I learn more about the process of science with NileRed videos.

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