That there are topics that LW cannot discuss productively, and that you regard it as somewhat dangerous to name these topics very directly, is one of your recurring themes. I’m curious: do you think there are any topics that produce high-quality discussions on LW, but that in society generally are as toxic (or if not as toxic just very toxic) as your unmentionable ones?
That there are topics that LW cannot discuss productively, and that you regard it as somewhat dangerous to name these topics very directly, is one of your recurring themes. I’m curious: do you think there are any topics that produce high-quality discussions on LW, but that in society generally are as toxic (or if not as toxic just very toxic) as your unmentionable ones?
Actually, in my opinion, LW is not at all bad when it comes to most topics that are impossible to discuss rationally almost anywhere else. The gender-related topics stand out as a particularly bad case of failure, but other than that, I can’t think of any examples that would make LW look bad in comparison with what happens elsewhere—and in many cases, it stands out as exceptionally good. (This is why I keep hanging out here, after all.)
One of my recurring themes is criticizing LW for failure to turn its formidable weapons of critical thinking against various high-status and officially accredited delusions and biases, its failure to recognize and criticize deep and systematic processes that generate and perpetuate bias and delusion in respectable and influential institutions and social circles, and also the occasional tendency to pride oneself on “rationality” demonstrated by rejecting low-status folkish delusions while blissfully falling in line with far more influential and dangerous high-status ones. However, outside of gender-related topics, when some concrete question is brought up where the mainstream respectable opinion is out of touch with reality, I usually can’t complain about the responses one gets here.
So on the whole, I would say that except for this particular failure, LW produces high-quality discussions on almost any topic that elicits interest among the participants. The problem with toxic topics in general is not that they would cause a breakdown of discourse here, but that the resulting discussions would reflect badly on the forum as an institution due to the very fact that they would have a closer grip on reality than the respectable opinion. So unfortunately we’re dealing with a lose-lose situation here—failing to recognize and straighten out issues where the respectable mainstream is delusional is by itself a bias and failure of rationality, but on the other hand, doing so would mean losing status in the eyes of the respectable mainstream. This, I think, has produced a tacit consensus that some especially charged topics are best not opened for fear of damaging the status of LW as an institution. Yet, regardless of that, except for the uniquely bad example of gender-related topics, insofar as any concrete controversial topics manage to elicit interest here, they are handled exceptionally well.
That there are topics that LW cannot discuss productively, and that you regard it as somewhat dangerous to name these topics very directly, is one of your recurring themes. I’m curious: do you think there are any topics that produce high-quality discussions on LW, but that in society generally are as toxic (or if not as toxic just very toxic) as your unmentionable ones?
Actually, in my opinion, LW is not at all bad when it comes to most topics that are impossible to discuss rationally almost anywhere else. The gender-related topics stand out as a particularly bad case of failure, but other than that, I can’t think of any examples that would make LW look bad in comparison with what happens elsewhere—and in many cases, it stands out as exceptionally good. (This is why I keep hanging out here, after all.)
One of my recurring themes is criticizing LW for failure to turn its formidable weapons of critical thinking against various high-status and officially accredited delusions and biases, its failure to recognize and criticize deep and systematic processes that generate and perpetuate bias and delusion in respectable and influential institutions and social circles, and also the occasional tendency to pride oneself on “rationality” demonstrated by rejecting low-status folkish delusions while blissfully falling in line with far more influential and dangerous high-status ones. However, outside of gender-related topics, when some concrete question is brought up where the mainstream respectable opinion is out of touch with reality, I usually can’t complain about the responses one gets here.
So on the whole, I would say that except for this particular failure, LW produces high-quality discussions on almost any topic that elicits interest among the participants. The problem with toxic topics in general is not that they would cause a breakdown of discourse here, but that the resulting discussions would reflect badly on the forum as an institution due to the very fact that they would have a closer grip on reality than the respectable opinion. So unfortunately we’re dealing with a lose-lose situation here—failing to recognize and straighten out issues where the respectable mainstream is delusional is by itself a bias and failure of rationality, but on the other hand, doing so would mean losing status in the eyes of the respectable mainstream. This, I think, has produced a tacit consensus that some especially charged topics are best not opened for fear of damaging the status of LW as an institution. Yet, regardless of that, except for the uniquely bad example of gender-related topics, insofar as any concrete controversial topics manage to elicit interest here, they are handled exceptionally well.