One of the best articles here lately. The first two advices are very good, even if probably not new, but you have formulated the point very persuasively. I would also not worry about the political example: in spite of the mind-killing abilities of politics, the way how you have stated your examples is unlikely to incite a flame war in this community (if it does, I will be afraid that our level of rationality is not much higher than that of average folk, despite our aspirations).
I have a little problem with the third advice, though. I suspect it would not work for many people. As a defense mechanism against dark arts, I have built an ability to relatively easily spot logical fallacies in arguments, and it happens that reading propaganda decreases my sympathies to the cause which the propaganda is promoting.
(I was a fairly strong leftist few years ago—now I am much closer to the centrist views, partly due to (at least I think so) reading a lot of propagandist crap on one left-wing server. I have decreased the frequency of reading that not only because I have now much lower expectation of finding something reasonable there, but also because I fear changing my political adherence for an irrational reason (stupidity reversal). Still, one of the reasons why I have not moved further to the right is occasional encounter with equally stupid right-wing propaganda. And existence of Randroids, of course.)
Is having correct political beliefs important to you? Because it seems like you have a serious deficiency there that, since you are aware of, you may be able to correct. For instance, exposing yourself to lots of high-quality arguments from both sides might help.
But we have no theory of correct political beliefs, so you might be kind of helpless here.
I didn’t intend to imply that I have avoided good arguments in favour of poor propaganda. I think I have heard most of the good arguments too (and the stupidity of the poor arguments is more apparent when compared to the good ones). I have only described the effect which propaganda has on me. This effect is irrational, since it activates the stupidity reversing reflex, so I try to avoid it; I wanted to point out that using propaganda as a mind hack may work differently for different people.
It may certainly depend on what do you exactly mean by centrism, but can you be more explicit in your statement about its lack of coherence?
Also, I am more likely to form my political beliefs based on my actual values rather than on elegant philosophical principles. Human values are complicated and unlikely to be expressible by a succinct coherent belief system.
is the centrist position today the same as the centrist position of 10 years ago? what about 100? what about the centrist position in germany in 1942? taking the average of two wrong positions is unlikely to produce a correct one.
and you admit that your values are incoherent so readily? that is unusual but highly beneficial as a starting point.
I have written that I am now closer to the centrist (as the word is defined now and in my country) views than I have been few years ago, when I was sympathetic with a bit more radical leftist (once again, as defined now and in my country) opinions. I have not included the clarifications in the parentheses because I did find that interpretation obvious. Since your replies imply that my words can be interpreted differently from what I have meant, I should have been perhaps more clear. So, I do not say that I average the extreme positions and that I am close to the centrist position just because it appears to lie in the centre, and thus I will shift my opinions when the centre moves.
and you admit that your values are incoherent so readily? that is unusual but highly beneficial as a starting point.
That they are incoherent or inconsistent doesn’t mean that they are so in an obvious manner. Values are complicated and not all conflicts are easy to see, and even after being seen, they are not easy to resolve. Think about the trolley problem for example.
Edit: just to be more clear, I have to add that the (approximately) centrist position I hold means sharing some opinions which are more common on the right and others which are prevalent on the left, not being close to average on each opinion separately.
No, he said that they’re probably either incoherent or not succinct.
There should exist coherent positions that are roughly in the center of the two parties/idealogies. One can argue that libertarianism is, for instance.
One of the best articles here lately. The first two advices are very good, even if probably not new, but you have formulated the point very persuasively. I would also not worry about the political example: in spite of the mind-killing abilities of politics, the way how you have stated your examples is unlikely to incite a flame war in this community (if it does, I will be afraid that our level of rationality is not much higher than that of average folk, despite our aspirations).
I have a little problem with the third advice, though. I suspect it would not work for many people. As a defense mechanism against dark arts, I have built an ability to relatively easily spot logical fallacies in arguments, and it happens that reading propaganda decreases my sympathies to the cause which the propaganda is promoting.
(I was a fairly strong leftist few years ago—now I am much closer to the centrist views, partly due to (at least I think so) reading a lot of propagandist crap on one left-wing server. I have decreased the frequency of reading that not only because I have now much lower expectation of finding something reasonable there, but also because I fear changing my political adherence for an irrational reason (stupidity reversal). Still, one of the reasons why I have not moved further to the right is occasional encounter with equally stupid right-wing propaganda. And existence of Randroids, of course.)
Is having correct political beliefs important to you? Because it seems like you have a serious deficiency there that, since you are aware of, you may be able to correct. For instance, exposing yourself to lots of high-quality arguments from both sides might help.
But we have no theory of correct political beliefs, so you might be kind of helpless here.
They used to be more important that they are now.
I didn’t intend to imply that I have avoided good arguments in favour of poor propaganda. I think I have heard most of the good arguments too (and the stupidity of the poor arguments is more apparent when compared to the good ones). I have only described the effect which propaganda has on me. This effect is irrational, since it activates the stupidity reversing reflex, so I try to avoid it; I wanted to point out that using propaganda as a mind hack may work differently for different people.
I’d start with coherence if you’re looking for correct beliefs of any sort. centrism certainly doesn’t meet this guideline.
It may certainly depend on what do you exactly mean by centrism, but can you be more explicit in your statement about its lack of coherence?
Also, I am more likely to form my political beliefs based on my actual values rather than on elegant philosophical principles. Human values are complicated and unlikely to be expressible by a succinct coherent belief system.
is the centrist position today the same as the centrist position of 10 years ago? what about 100? what about the centrist position in germany in 1942? taking the average of two wrong positions is unlikely to produce a correct one.
and you admit that your values are incoherent so readily? that is unusual but highly beneficial as a starting point.
I have written that I am now closer to the centrist (as the word is defined now and in my country) views than I have been few years ago, when I was sympathetic with a bit more radical leftist (once again, as defined now and in my country) opinions. I have not included the clarifications in the parentheses because I did find that interpretation obvious. Since your replies imply that my words can be interpreted differently from what I have meant, I should have been perhaps more clear. So, I do not say that I average the extreme positions and that I am close to the centrist position just because it appears to lie in the centre, and thus I will shift my opinions when the centre moves.
That they are incoherent or inconsistent doesn’t mean that they are so in an obvious manner. Values are complicated and not all conflicts are easy to see, and even after being seen, they are not easy to resolve. Think about the trolley problem for example.
Edit: just to be more clear, I have to add that the (approximately) centrist position I hold means sharing some opinions which are more common on the right and others which are prevalent on the left, not being close to average on each opinion separately.
No, he said that they’re probably either incoherent or not succinct.
There should exist coherent positions that are roughly in the center of the two parties/idealogies. One can argue that libertarianism is, for instance.
directional metaphors may fail if looked at with reasonable rigor.
Any statement may appear incoherent if looked at with unreasonable rigor.