User Tag List

View Poll Results: Do you agree with the OP?

Voters
27. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes, I lean towards the left and this is a real thing

    5 18.52%
  • No, I lean towards the left and this is a fiction

    3 11.11%
  • I lean towards the left I sort of agree and sort of don't (explain)

    4 14.81%
  • Yes, I lean towards the right and this is a real thing

    4 14.81%
  • No, I lean towards the right and this is a fiction

    0 0%
  • I lean towards the right. I sort of agree and sort of don't (explain)

    1 3.70%
  • I couldn't give a shit about politics

    4 14.81%
  • Other (please elaborate)

    6 22.22%
First 5678917 Last

Results 61 to 70 of 199

  1. #61
    breaking out of my cocoon SearchingforPeace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    MBTI
    ENFJ
    Enneagram
    9w8 sx/so
    Socionics
    EIE None
    Posts
    6,537

    Default

    Echo chambers are not just related to political ideologies.

    I used to be pretty active in some sport forums related to my alma maters. One was such a zone of purity and conformity that I stopped posting long ago, and only read it once or twice a year.

    I also frequented a conference board for one of my alma maters, but found that, for all the many schools represented, there was effectively uniformity in hating on my alma mater in that conference (which had the most success for decades). It was an echo chamber of hate and bullying.

    It is a long held principle of the Enlightenment that ideas improve as they are opposed and debated. John S. Mill wrote that if a person only understands their own side of an argument, then a person really doesn't understand either their opponent's position of their own.

    The very act of having to argue a point against someone requires people to know and understand their own positions better. Most people adopt their positions with only modest reflection and understanding. The positions seem to fit with a personal viewpoint.

    Uniform ideological areas leave people stunted and poorly developed. They are incapable of debating ideas and instead usually react poorly and uncivilly in an emotional, projecting malacious and vile intents on their ideological opponents.

    A good example of the failure of an echo chamber is the Hillary campaign. Hillary ran her campaign along a very strict methodology. They used a Google supplied AI to make all decisions. Reports from the field were ignored. Bill Clinton was ignored and disrespected by her campaign manager for pointing out the problems in the Midwest and the importance of focusing on working class voters. They had no idea that they would lose, in large part because they couldn't see out of the echo chamber and dismissed all reports or arguments to the contrary.

    The echo chamber is not inevitable. Only a few contrary voices are necessary to destroy it. To fight the echo chamber effect, one must allow alternative, heterodox views, and stop efforts to silence them.

    Under Haidt's Moral Foundations Theory, there are 6 moral levers that exist. Left-liberals only use 2, fairness and care. Libertarians use 2, fairness and liberty. Conservatives use 6. From his research, conservatives tend to understand others the best, while left-liberals struggle to even understand the value system of others. Haidt himself comes from a left-liberal value system and his struggle to find and understand is evident from his work.

    To actually have discussions between groups, it is necessary that people accept that people of different ideology and systems can actually have good faith reasons for doing so. It is necessary to read the words of others in the light seeing the most positive reading possible, rather than looking for hidden agendas and hostile intent.

    Most people struggle to do so, and instead react with hostility to any opposing views.

    In the forum, the pattern has been to silence dissenters from the acceptable orthodoxy. Disco was silenced but not the bullies and trolls evho attacked him over and over again, without any visible consequences. In effect, the moderation here acts as an enforcer of majority narratives rather than protecting the intellectual and ideological diversity that strengthens.

    I really doubt any change is possible without a serious effort to police those that support the majority narrative, punishing the crew of bullies and trolls that constantly attacked Disco, who seem to never receive punishment no matter how much they troll and engage in personal attacks.

    But given there has never been any effort to do so in my 2.5 years in the forum.....
    Quote Originally Posted by Archilochus
    The fox knows many things--the hedgehog one big one.
    And I am not a hedgehog......

    -------------------

    Jesus said "Blessed are the peacemakers" not "blessed are the conflict avoiders.....

    9w8 6w5 4w5 sx/so

    ----------------------

    “Orthodoxy means not thinking--not needing to think. Orthodoxy is unconsciousness.”
    ― George Orwell, 1984
    Likes SpankyMcFly, Isk Stark, Xann liked this post

  2. #62
    Theta Male Julius_Van_Der_Beak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    MBTI
    CROW
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/so
    Socionics
    LII None
    Posts
    8,899

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by highlander View Post
    I think what it means is early and influential people on a forum. If we take a couple example of early members on the site @Totenkindly and @Ivy. They probably lean more towards the right than the left politically. For sure Ivy does. Does that have an influence on the culture? It probably does.

    Is this a typo? I remember them being left-wing, often too one-sidedly at times. I actually find it harder to take accusations of mod bias seriously these days than back in those days of yore.
    This is not going to go the way you think....
    Visit my Johari: http://kevan.org/johari?name=Birddude78

  3. #63
    Undisciplined Starry's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    5,590

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Red Herring View Post
    Maybe I misunderstand you here, but you seem to be implying that not allowing racism, antisemitism, xenophobia,sexism, homophobia etc is somehow inherently anti-conservative. That is pretty insulting to conservatives, I think.

    These things can be found anywhere on the spectrum, just in different shapes, sadly. They shouln't have a place in civilized society. And they are no more legitimate "opinions" worth respecting than "Baby blood makes for a healthy breakfast" or "the lizard people are running Wall Street".

    You wouldn't claim that a rule against calling another member an asshole is somehow politically biased.

    Well, I should start by saying that you are preaching to the choir and due to the fact I've been singing this same song on this forum for years now to no avail...a song I've actually never heard you or Hard sing (not saying you haven't I'm just saying I've never heard this song out of you) I'll be honest and say having my message tossed back at me as if I'm saying the opposite is slightly irritating but whatever. That's what TypoC is for.

    So as it pertains to this thread I’m trying to feel my way over to “the right” and make no claims of having arrived at that destination. Nor am I making any statements or implications here. I’m asking questions based on what I *think* I’m seeing.

    Attacks on individuals are kinda a no-brainer in my opinion whether we as a forum choose to acknowledge them as such or not. Wouldn't you agree? Yup, from your post it looks like you do. I may seem kinda dumb I realize that...but "No." I don't think calling another member an asshole is somehow politically biased.

    I want to talk honestly for a change about what happens when a person's opinion is "Gays are evil and do not deserve the same rights as heterosexuals." Or "Women are not as intelligent as men and should thus be subservient to men." Which is why your "the lizard people are running Wall Street" is not really a helpful example.

    Do I notice a correlation between conservative politics and the two examples of opinions I put forth? Yah, I actually do. Which is precisely why I'm asking the questions that I am.

  4. #64
    nee andante bechimo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    7,920

    Default

    I'm a fan of @Totenkindly and her moderation. @Ivy was also alright.
    Likes Hard liked this post

  5. #65
    Theta Male Julius_Van_Der_Beak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    MBTI
    CROW
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/so
    Socionics
    LII None
    Posts
    8,899

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Starry View Post
    If I am completely honest with myself... from everything I've seen here I have wondered if it is even possible for an individual that identifies as "right" to openly share their political views without simultaneously violating the above FAQ when doing so. That's pretty much the point of where I'm at... And believe me, I want to be wrong here...but not once have I seen it.


    I almost want to say...echo chamber...or get rid of the above.
    To be honest, if it were me calling the shots, I'd probably get rid of the latter. I don't think echo chambers are healthy.

    Quote Originally Posted by Qlip
    Taking a very extreme hypothetical... not what I am depicting as a characterization of anybody's position, I honestly do think you can profess your belief that all people born with disabilities should be euthanized while communicating in a ways that doesn't "vilify, degrade, attack or incite prejudicial action" against people with disabilities. But yes, a person can't do that if their goal is to turn this forum into a pulpit for their belief.
    Well, I'd argue that, taken from the perspective that if one(like myself) is against the idea that all people with disabilities should be euthanized, someone who manages to do what you claim is actually way worse than someone who doesn't, because the person who expresses things tactfully manages to make it look respectable. It's curious to me that so many people think the opposite is the case. I suppose this is just based on what bothers them more, rather than what actually has worse practical consequences.

    It's actually better for people who are against euthanasia of disabilities if the opposition makes an ass of themselves, because they discredit their own cause.
    This is not going to go the way you think....
    Visit my Johari: http://kevan.org/johari?name=Birddude78

  6. #66

    Default

    I also think there's a wild bit of gas lighting, trolling and messing on the forum. Probably more than there is actual politics, even the angried up irrational sort.
    It is a luxury to be understood - Ralph Waldo Emerson

    Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities - Voltaire

    A kind thought is the hope of the world - Anon
    Likes Qlip liked this post

  7. #67
    breaking out of my cocoon SearchingforPeace's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    MBTI
    ENFJ
    Enneagram
    9w8 sx/so
    Socionics
    EIE None
    Posts
    6,537

    Default

    Kids, Would You Please Start Fighting? - The New York Times

    .....

    The skill to get hot without getting mad — to have a good argument that doesn’t become personal — is critical in life. But it’s one that few parents teach to their children. We want to give kids a stable home, so we stop siblings from quarreling and we have our own arguments behind closed doors. Yet if kids never get exposed to disagreement, we’ll end up limiting their creativity.

    ....

    We’ve known groupthink is a problem for a long time: We’ve watched ill-fated wars unfold after dissenting voices were silenced. But teaching kids to argue is more important than ever. Now we live in a time when voices that might offend are silenced on college campuses, when politics has become an untouchable topic in many circles, even more fraught than religion or race. We should know better: Our legal system is based on the idea that arguments are necessary for justice. For our society to remain free and open, kids need to learn the value of open disagreement.

    .....

    It turns out that highly creative adults often grow up in families full of tension. Not fistfights or personal insults, but real disagreements. When adults in their early 30s were asked to write imaginative stories, the most creative ones came from those whose parents had the most conflict a quarter-century earlier. Their parents had clashing views on how to raise children. They had different values and attitudes and interests. And when highly creative architects and scientists were compared with their technically skilled but less original peers, the innovators often had more friction in their families. As the psychologist Robert Albert put it, “the creative person-to-be comes from a family that is anything but harmonious, one with a ‘wobble.’ ”

    .....

    If we rarely see a spat, we learn to shy away from the threat of conflict. Witnessing arguments — and participating in them — helps us grow a thicker skin. We develop the will to fight uphill battles and the skill to win those battles, and the resilience to lose a battle today without losing our resolve tomorrow.

    ......

    Brainstorming groups generate 16 percent more ideas when the members are encouraged to criticize one another. The most creative ideas in Chinese technology companies and the best decisions in American hospitals come from teams that have real disagreements early on. Breakthrough labs in microbiology aren’t full of enthusiastic collaborators cheering one another on but of skeptical scientists challenging one another’s interpretations.

    .......

    If no one ever argues, you’re not likely to give up on old ways of doing things, let alone try new ones. Disagreement is the antidote to groupthink. We’re at our most imaginative when we’re out of sync. There’s no better time than childhood to learn how to dish it out — and to take it.

    ......

    Children need to learn the value of thoughtful disagreement. Sadly, many parents teach kids that if they disagree with someone, it’s polite to hold their tongues. Rubbish. What if we taught kids that silence is bad manners? It disrespects the other person’s ability to have a civil argument — and it disrespects the value of your own viewpoint and your own voice. It’s a sign of respect to care enough about someone’s opinion that you’re willing to challenge it.

    .....

    Instead of trying to prevent arguments, we should be modeling courteous conflict and teaching kids how to have healthy disagreements. We can start with four rules:

    • Frame it as a debate, rather than a conflict.

    • Argue as if you’re right but listen as if you’re wrong.

    • Make the most respectful interpretation of the other person’s perspective.

    • Acknowledge where you agree with your critics and what you’ve learned from them.

    .....
    Quote Originally Posted by Archilochus
    The fox knows many things--the hedgehog one big one.
    And I am not a hedgehog......

    -------------------

    Jesus said "Blessed are the peacemakers" not "blessed are the conflict avoiders.....

    9w8 6w5 4w5 sx/so

    ----------------------

    “Orthodoxy means not thinking--not needing to think. Orthodoxy is unconsciousness.”
    ― George Orwell, 1984
    Likes Gunboat Diplomat liked this post

  8. #68
    Undisciplined Starry's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    5,590

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Julius_Van_Der_Beak View Post
    To be honest, if it were me calling the shots, I'd probably get rid of the latter. I don't think echo chambers are healthy.
    Yah...you are very much one of the people I vividly remember sharing all of the same reservations I did as it pertained to the creation of the new FAQs back in 2013 I believe. And I will tell you that many times since then members have said to me "Oh yah this place was so hostile back then we definitely needed safe spaces" and "The new rules have transformed this place as hostility is pretty much a thing of the past..." <-And I just don't see it on either count... which always has of way of making me feel slightly crazier than I already am. This place is less hostile? Really?

    The way I see things is there's always going to be some hostility in a diverse large social or public setting...how do you care to deal with it? I would like to deal with it immediately, honestly and openly so we can move forward until the next time. <-A lot of people are not like me is seems. When we try to create a bunch of rules to make sure we never hear a thing that might piss us off... now we have entered an environment that feels a million times more hostile to me. Now it is all been channeled and is operating underground...behind the scenes...now the hostility is in secrets and lies and manipulations and creepy social niceties that make me want to say "don't treat me kindly when doing so benefits you and then try to cause me harm when no one else is looking..."

    When hostility goes underground and everything is smoke and mirrors...that's hostility that we will never get a break from... the break I mentioned above. And so we spend our time swatting at phantoms and creating suspicion and greater gaps between us... or we become an echo chamber and/or we stick to discussing the weather and what we're doing this weekend.

  9. #69
    Theta Male Julius_Van_Der_Beak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    MBTI
    CROW
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/so
    Socionics
    LII None
    Posts
    8,899

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Starry View Post
    Yah...you are very much one of the people I vividly remember sharing all of the same reservations I did as it pertained to the creation of the new FAQs back in 2013 I believe. And I will tell you that many times since then members have said to me "Oh yah this place was so hostile back then we definitely needed safe spaces" and "The new rules have transformed this place as hostility is pretty much a thing of the past..." <-And I just don't see it on either count... which always has of way of making me feel slightly crazier than I already am. This place is less hostile? Really?
    It's funny how people don't see me as that person (that I get no "credit" from people for that). Part of why I've been less neutral in political discussions lately is that I'm tired of the constant "LOL your just a Libtard SJW beta male urban elitist who likes Dijon mustard" stuff that is really all the conversations have become about. Looking back, I think the "no hostility" thing was part of a larger cultural trend that sort of backfired (but that's off topic). Even so, that doesn't mean I want those people off the forum. But... rules are rules. Nobody wants to bother to work up enough fuss to change them (as I observed during previous tense periods on the forum), so I can't be bothered to care. Hence my ambivalence.

    The way I see things is there's always going to be some hostility in a diverse large social or public setting...how do you care to deal with it? I would like to deal with it immediately, honestly and openly so we can move forward until the next time. <-A lot of people are not like me is seems. When we try to create a bunch of rules to make sure we never hear a thing that might piss us off... now we have entered an environment that feels a million times more hostile to me. Now it is all been channeled and is operating underground...behind the scenes...now the hostility is in secrets and lies and manipulations and creepy social niceties that make me want to say "don't treat me kindly when doing so benefits you and then try to cause me harm when no one else is looking..."

    When hostility goes underground and everything is smoke and mirrors...that's hostility that we will never get a break from... the break I mentioned above. And so we spend our time swatting at phantoms and creating suspicion and greater gaps between us... or we become an echo chamber that sticks to discussing the weather and what we're doing this weekend.
    There's some truth to that.
    This is not going to go the way you think....
    Visit my Johari: http://kevan.org/johari?name=Birddude78

  10. #70
    Undisciplined Starry's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    5,590

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Julius_Van_Der_Beak View Post
    It's funny how people don't see me as that person (that I get no "credit" from people for that). Part of why I've been less neutral in political discussions lately is that I'm tired of the constant "LOL your just a Libtard SJW beta male urban elitist who likes Dijon mustard" stuff that is really all the conversations have become about. Looking back, I think the "no hostility" thing was part of a larger cultural trend that sort of backfired (but that's off topic). Even so, that doesn't mean I want those people off the forum. But... rules are rules. Nobody wants to bother to work up enough fuss to change them (as I observed during previous tense periods on the forum), so I can't be bothered to care. Hence my ambivalence.
    SJW beta male urban elitist that likes Dijon? Yah right. What about how you nearly caused the collapse of mankind and life as we know it by suggesting we give-up “Facebook liking” for a week? What about that huh? Pfft Dijon mustard lover my ass.



    There's some truth to that.
    If I wasn’t on my phone in a shopping center parking lot and was likewise inclined to say all that I should say to be complete in my message...I wonder if I could raise that “some” to a firm “quite a lot of”... I kinda feel I could. But that’s based on my awareness of the micro echo chamber you and I have haha no... if we use TypoC as our example in an effort to highlight/illustrate the content in the OP then we know on what side of the fence this echo chamber is on (or will fall to sorry editing after the fact) Why is this?

    When your ideology is entirely invested in the notion that there are winners and losers like those on the conservative right do...then there will be ongoing loser identification (as well as identifying those who are preventing you from winning all that you just know you should be winning) and I don’t really give a fuck which liberal I offend in saying that. That is what I believe and our rules don’t allow for that.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO