For eating at people’s houses: usually people will have enough side-dishes that if one does not make a big deal of it, one can fill up on non-meat dishes. At worst, there’s always bread.
For going to steakhouse—yes, but at every other place, there’s usually a vegetarian option, if one tries hard enough.
It does make a good case for being an unannoying vegetarian...but being a strict-vegetarian is a useful Schelling point.
These lines of thinking seem to be a pretty big rationalization risk. Does human political behavior really act like cooling atoms? Sure, if thinking that way makes me feel good about my political choices!
These lines of thinking seem to be a pretty big rationalization risk.
I agree with this, but am confused by your criticism of the evaporative cooling metaphor. Rationalization and mechanisms for a group to become more extreme are not the same topic.
For eating at people’s houses: usually people will have enough side-dishes that if one does not make a big deal of it, one can fill up on non-meat dishes. At worst, there’s always bread.
For going to steakhouse—yes, but at every other place, there’s usually a vegetarian option, if one tries hard enough.
It does make a good case for being an unannoying vegetarian...but being a strict-vegetarian is a useful Schelling point.
These lines of thinking seem to be a pretty big rationalization risk. Does human political behavior really act like cooling atoms? Sure, if thinking that way makes me feel good about my political choices!
I agree with this, but am confused by your criticism of the evaporative cooling metaphor. Rationalization and mechanisms for a group to become more extreme are not the same topic.
I wasn’t responding to the evaporative-cooling metaphor.