Author Topic: "Rules of Engagement," article on modern debate-me culture from The New Republic  (Read 6864 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline John Albert

  • Too Much Spare Time
  • ********
  • Posts: 6001
A lot of times, the "like" function on this forums functions as social signaling more than anything else.

Isn't that the function of "Like" buttons everywhere?

For whatever it's worth, I feel that social media gimmicks such as the "Like" function don't really belong in a skeptics discussion forum because they basically represent an appeal to popularity.

Offline stands2reason

  • Empiricist, Positivist, Militant Agnostic
  • Poster of Extraordinary Magnitude
  • **********
  • Posts: 10245
A lot of times, the "like" function on this forums functions as social signaling more than anything else.

Isn't that the function of "Like" buttons everywhere?

For whatever it's worth, I feel that social media gimmicks such as the "Like" function don't really belong in a skeptics discussion forum because they basically represent an appeal to popularity.

I appreciate it as a way to vote your approval of a post in contrast with posting a reply to that effect.

Offline John Albert

  • Too Much Spare Time
  • ********
  • Posts: 6001
Yeah, I've used it that way too. But it also adds a social media feel to the site, which might be feeding into the problematic "echo chamber" effect.

Offline Quetzalcoatl

  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *******
  • Posts: 4795
Yeah, I too think the "like" button could be considered for removal.
"I’m a member of no party. I have no ideology. I’m a rationalist. I do what I can in the international struggle between science and reason and the barbarism, superstition and stupidity that’s all around us." - Christopher Hitchens

Offline Quetzalcoatl

  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *******
  • Posts: 4795
Like-policing is the whiniest thing I can imagine.  Just stop, Quetz.  Your persecution complex is annoying at the best of times, but absolutely intolerable most of the time.

Someone called him a racist, several people liked the post, he pointed that out, one member challenged him implying that he never liked the post, once proved incorrect the member went on to blow it off as if it was no big deal. 

How exactly does Quetz  have a "persecution complex"? He is clearly treated differently.

Come to think of it, arthwolliport asked me several times to apologize for my accusation. Then when it showed to be true, he completely brushed it off as if it was nothing. No apology was offered, nothing. arthwolliport's behavior just screams in the face of how he views social status and hierarchy, though I'm not sure he is aware of it. Low-status me is supposed to apologize to him. High-status him is not supposed to apologize to a low-status person, that it simply beneath him. High-status people like him treat low-status people however they see fit.

Primate hierarchies are really, really ugly to behold.
"I’m a member of no party. I have no ideology. I’m a rationalist. I do what I can in the international struggle between science and reason and the barbarism, superstition and stupidity that’s all around us." - Christopher Hitchens

Offline Rai

  • PIZZASAURUS
  • Global Moderator
  • Too Much Spare Time
  • *****
  • Posts: 6812
Moderator Comment This thread is getting awfully close to de factp changing its topic to "airing persona grievances", which is not quite cricket

Offline Quetzalcoatl

  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *******
  • Posts: 4795
People here should read this: How to Argue in the Comments

For people who want to be critical thinkers, it is essential reading.

Especially consider these points:

Quote from: Steven Novella
It is very easy to talk at people than to or with them. I often find that people are not responding to what I actually wrote, but to some cartoon they have in their mind about what the “other side” thinks, or whatever side they imagine I am on (often falsely). Don’t assume that the person you are talking to has a particular position they have not expressed.

Quote from: Steven Novella
Don’t play the semantic game, parsing words and definitions in such a way as to reconstruct someone else’s position into something other than what it is. Work together with the other person to clarify definitions and uses of words, to be unambiguous, so that you understand what they actually mean.

Quote from: Steven Novella
I would argue, it is best to have no emotional investment in any particular factual claim. Your identity should not be tied up with a specific ideology. Rather, it is better to value the process. This way you will be motivated to admit error, because that shows you are true to the process.

Humans, however, are tribal and we tend to plant our flags in specific ideological positions, and then defend them at all costs. You can transcend this default mode, however, by simply staking your claim in the process rather than the outcome.
« Last Edit: June 04, 2019, 08:42:59 AM by Quetzalcoatl »
"I’m a member of no party. I have no ideology. I’m a rationalist. I do what I can in the international struggle between science and reason and the barbarism, superstition and stupidity that’s all around us." - Christopher Hitchens

Offline stands2reason

  • Empiricist, Positivist, Militant Agnostic
  • Poster of Extraordinary Magnitude
  • **********
  • Posts: 10245
Maybe we should have a forum politics & grievances thread (in Members Only). This kind of discussion keeps cropping up because there apparently isn't a place to talk about it.

Shouldn't be too bad if it's evidende-based (referring to the aggrieving posts). Disagree? Then debate me, bro.

Offline Quetzalcoatl

  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *******
  • Posts: 4795
I initially enjoyed this place because more often than other forums, people seemed to be able to disagree about things without so much hyperbole, bad faith or taking things overly personal. I'm starting to perceive it as being worse than most other online communities when it comes to the discourse between people who disagree.

I'll just try and stick to safer threads about movies, books and silly things for this forum.

You are absolutely correct.

There are other forums out there with more intellectually mature memberships for the discussion of serious subjects. One should probably stick to discussing the above-mentioned "silly things" on this forum, as well as specific SGU episodes or SGU-related issues.

It is sad though, that this forum gets to claim association with a brilliant podcast.
"I’m a member of no party. I have no ideology. I’m a rationalist. I do what I can in the international struggle between science and reason and the barbarism, superstition and stupidity that’s all around us." - Christopher Hitchens

Offline John Albert

  • Too Much Spare Time
  • ********
  • Posts: 6001
There are other forums out there with more intellectually mature memberships for the discussion of serious subjects.

What are these other forums? Are they also dedicated to discussion of science and skepticism?

(Feel free to PM me if you don't feel comfortable making referrals to outside forums.)

 

personate-rain
personate-rain