Dissent: the topic that never loses its relevance


#1

I love our little community here, even though – and also because – some members are people I probably wouldn’t meet or even want to meet in real life. It’s good that we have this space to come together and learn from each other. :2cents:

The video is about 22 minutes long.


Cargo cult?
#2

Hey Americans, I’m not going to stop posting Steve Paikin interviews until you stop heading towards civil war!

In the second half they talk about this article:

Highlights:

“A funny thing happens,” Haidt said, “when you take young human beings, whose minds evolved for tribal warfare and us/them thinking, and you fill those minds full of binary dimensions. You tell them that one side in each binary is good and the other is bad. You turn on their ancient tribal circuits, preparing them for battle. Many students find it thrilling; it floods them with a sense of meaning and purpose.”

The problem is that tribal common-enemy thinking tears a diverse nation apart.

This pattern is not just on campus. Look at the negative polarization that marks our politics. Parties, too, are no longer bound together by creeds but by enemies.

Once you’ve identified your herd’s oppressor — the neoliberal order, the media elite, white males, whatever — your goodness is secure. You have virtue without obligation. Nothing is your fault.

Haidt and Bruckner are very different writers, with different philosophies. But they both point to the fact that we’ve regressed from a sophisticated moral ethos to a primitive one. The crooked timber school of humanity says the line between good and evil runs through each person and we fight injustice on the basis of our common humanity. The oppressor/oppressed morality says the line runs between tribes. That makes it easy to feel good about yourself. But it makes you very hard to live with.

They also mention a study showing that each side in the current American left-right conflict overestimates the prevalence of extremist views on the other side. (I’m shocked I tell you, shocked.)


The narratives about Trump thread.
#3

Uh oh, you have a flaw. You link the NY Times. Fake news.


#4

Jonathan’s back, to explain how SM addiction (together with some other stuff) caused the current culture crisis in the West by ruining the brains of young people! :brain: :astonished:


#5

sorry, I’m not too fashionable, but “SM” addiction is what?


#6

I think very few people come here to learn or be persuaded. Quite the opposite. Maybe when asking advice on restaurants, visas, or where to shop, sure. But otherwise, no way. Especially not on subjects such as politics, religion, nuclear power, air pollution, etc.


#7

I’ll offer some dissent here, I consistently learn a lot in forum debates and discussions, whether or not I might agree with any particular viewpoint


#8

Ok. But reading thru numerous threads in the subjects that I’ve mentioned - its more like this:

A - “name your city” pollution is worse than its ever been.
B- No it aint, its better.
A - No, its worse.
B- No, its better.
And on & on. I learn nothing from these exchanges.


#9

That’s a very particular and disfunctional example, but some conversations are like that, for sure.


#10

No they’re not.


#11

Eh, go start a protest


#12

Yes, but there are many other examples. Especially in many of the politics threads.


#13

Yeah.
“You know, after a lot of careful consideration, after taking time to thoroughly digest the available information, and taking a step back to realise that we’re all just humans trying like the bejeeziss to get through the day, I’ve completely changed my mind and now wholly agree with the viewpoint I previously opposed.”

Said nobody on the Internet.
Ever.


#14

There’s a lot of it there, but interesting things come up a lot too.


#15

there’s a lot of dissenting over the topic of dissent


#16

I’ve been here just for some amusements, and I sometimes get interesting info here, even in the conversations repeating yes, it is, no it isn’t.


#17

Can’t. Busy checking my bias.


#18

It helps when entering into a discussion to actually have a particular view on something and to stand up for it, people that do that even I may disagree earn my respect.

@yyy if the intention is to play the devils advocate all the time, like the peanut gallery basically, then when someone turns around and challenges your point of view, claim you weren’t actually presenting one, then you don’t have an honest discussion IMO. It’s a disingenuous attempt by one side to mud sling where they have no intention of defending their ideas.


#19

It’s like claiming a mythical moral high ground with a foundation consisting of a lack of facts.


#20

It depends how they stand up for their views. Some do it in a more rational/reasonable/clever/humorous way than others. Some just use border-line hate speech.