.
19-10-13 Doing Social Justice Responsibly | Helen Pluckrose | New Discourses > .
Showing posts with label rationality. Show all posts
Showing posts with label rationality. Show all posts
Monday, 16 December 2024
Thursday, 12 December 2024
Saturday, 16 March 2024
Democracy - Precious, Fragile
.
24-7-14 "There is No Genocide, No Apartheid, No Occupation" | Triggernometry > .
24-7-12 Melanie Phillips: Britain chooses Labour [Danger to Israel, West] - JNS > .
24-5-2 Suella Braverman [slams] Iran-Sponsored [XIR] Terror Networks | Eylon > .
24-1-28 Проблемы демократии | Democracy's Ills | Myth or Reality (subs) - MK > .
23-2-8 Is Democracy Doomed? Global Fight for Future | Timothy Snyder | TED > .
23-12-10 End of Democracy in 2024? - WW2 > .
23-11-19 Niall Ferguson: How Civilizations Collapse - Triggernometry > .weakism
Grift of Prophecy
Monday, 23 October 2023
Exhaust Alternatives
If at first you don't succeed, try try again ..........
"The question is whether there is any reason to believe that such a new era may yet come to pass. If I am sanguine on this point, it is because of a conviction that men and nations do behave wisely once they have exhausted all other alternatives. Surely the other alternatives of war and belligerency have now been exhausted." ~ Abba Eban*
And indeed, we often know how to do things by the philosophy that was expounded by another Irishman I know. He said that you can depend on Americans to do the right thing when they have exhausted every other possibility. ~ U.S. Congressional Hearing in 1970
Friday, 13 October 2023
Patriotism vs Nationalism
"Le patriotisme c'est l'amour des siens. Le nationalisme c'est la haine des autres. ... Si l'on retranchait du patriotisme de la plupart des hommes la haine et le mépris des autres nations, il resterait peu de choses." [Charles de Gaulle]
Translation: "Patriotism is the love of one's own. Nationalism is hatred of others. ... If we extracted the hatred and contempt of other nations from the patriotism of most men, little would remain."
More simply: “Patriotism is love of one's own; nationalism is hatred of others.” [Charles de Gaulle]
“Nationalism is not to be confused with patriotism. Both words are normally used in so vague a way that any definition is liable to be challenged, but one must draw a distinction between them, since two different and even opposing ideas are involved. By ‘patriotism’ I mean devotion to a particular place and a particular way of life, which one believes to be the best in the world but has no wish to force on other people. Patriotism is of its nature defensive, both militarily and culturally. Nationalism, on the other hand, is inseparable from the desire for power. The abiding purpose of every nationalist is to secure more power and more prestige, not for himself but for the nation or other unit in which he has chosen to sink his own individuality.” [George Orwell]
“The difference between patriotism and nationalism is that the patriot is proud of his country for what it does, and the nationalist is proud of his country no matter what it does; the first attitude creates a feeling of responsibility, but the second a feeling of blind arrogance that leads to war.” [Sydney J. Harris]
Friday, 6 October 2023
Wasted Talent
"I am, somehow, less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein’s brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops." -- Stephen Jay Gould, The Panda's Thumb: More Reflections in Natural History
Friday, 13 January 2023
Weighing "Weakism's" Worth
23-4-20 America's Equity Obsession: Heather Mac Donald > .
24-6-15 Not all Cultures are Equal (and you know it) - traveling > .
24-2-15 Harvard wins Lifetime Censorship Award - FIRE > .
23-6-29 Affirmative Action [Reverse Discrimination] vs. Race-Neutral | WSJ > .
"Somewhere along the way, pseudo-intellectuals mistook criticism for critical thinking." ~ Something Bertrand Russell Might Have Said
23-1-6 The war on rationality | Steven Pinker - Big Think > .Sunday, 25 April 2021
Disintegrating Realities
ώ Kathleen Stock: I won't be silenced - UnHerd > .
Kathleen Stock was forced to resign from Sussex University professor after an aggressive campaign of targeted harassment over her gender critical views.
The campaign to push Prof Stock out of Sussex began when she self-published a number blog posts critical of extreme transgender ideology. She was concerned that the majority of academics, including philosophers such as herself, were reluctant to criticise campaigns to introduce self-identification for transgender people.
Although Kathleen is understandably upset by the conduct of the small number of abusive students, she is adamant that many of them are taking a cue from the influential adults around them. “I don’t think they’ve actually read what I think. There’s a lot of enabling, or inciting, of individuals in this story,” she says.
00:55 - 02:31 - Kathleen Stock tells her story
02:31 - 03:39 - The anti-Stock Sussex protests
03:39 - 07:24 - Where did Katheen’s trans ideology journey begin?
07:24 - 13:34 - Julie Bindel and Kathleen Stock name names
13:34 - 17:47 - Is trans ideology rooted in misogyny?
17:47 - 20:10 - Julie Bindel: This debate is being stifled
20:10 - 23:52 - How does this affect young lesbians?
23:52 - 24:58 - Katheen Stock’s book, Material Girls
24:58 - 26:39 - Stonewall has taken over our national institutions
26:39 - 33:48 - Kathleen’s battle with her Sussex University union
33:48 - 37:52 - Maria Miller MP began the self-identification process
37:52 - 40:45 - Julie Bindel on prostitution and the end result of self-ID
40:45 - 47:19 - The human cost of trans protests
47:19 - 49:13 - What’s the future for women’s rights, Stonewall, LGBTQI+, in the UK?
49:13 - 49:30 - Julie's conclusion
The campaign to push Prof Stock out of Sussex began when she self-published a number blog posts critical of extreme transgender ideology. She was concerned that the majority of academics, including philosophers such as herself, were reluctant to criticise campaigns to introduce self-identification for transgender people.
Although Kathleen is understandably upset by the conduct of the small number of abusive students, she is adamant that many of them are taking a cue from the influential adults around them. “I don’t think they’ve actually read what I think. There’s a lot of enabling, or inciting, of individuals in this story,” she says.
00:55 - 02:31 - Kathleen Stock tells her story
02:31 - 03:39 - The anti-Stock Sussex protests
03:39 - 07:24 - Where did Katheen’s trans ideology journey begin?
07:24 - 13:34 - Julie Bindel and Kathleen Stock name names
13:34 - 17:47 - Is trans ideology rooted in misogyny?
17:47 - 20:10 - Julie Bindel: This debate is being stifled
20:10 - 23:52 - How does this affect young lesbians?
23:52 - 24:58 - Katheen Stock’s book, Material Girls
24:58 - 26:39 - Stonewall has taken over our national institutions
26:39 - 33:48 - Kathleen’s battle with her Sussex University union
33:48 - 37:52 - Maria Miller MP began the self-identification process
37:52 - 40:45 - Julie Bindel on prostitution and the end result of self-ID
40:45 - 47:19 - The human cost of trans protests
47:19 - 49:13 - What’s the future for women’s rights, Stonewall, LGBTQI+, in the UK?
49:13 - 49:30 - Julie's conclusion
Sunday, 11 April 2021
Regressive Authoritarian Left
Psychology at the extremes seldom differs ...
2017 Roger Scruton: How Fake Subjects like Women Studies Invaded Academia > .
24-2-15 Real DEI (PRA) Program [Divisive Extremist Ideology] - New Discources > .
The Psychology of Progressive Hostility: Outbursts of emotional hostility from progressive activists – now described as Social Justice Warriors or SJWs – have come to be known as getting ‘triggered.’ This term originally applied to sufferers of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, but activists have adopted it to describe the anxiety and discomfort they experience when they are exposed to views with which they disagree. “Fuck free speech!” one group of social justice advocates recently told Vice Media, as if this justified the growing belief among university students that conservatives should be prevented from speaking on college campuses. It’s no secret that, with the rise of the triggered progressive, university professors are increasingly intimidated by their own students.
...
In 2014, one of the world’s leading scholars in the field of moral psychology was publicly accused of homophobia for showing his class a video about the phenomenon of ‘Moral Dumbfounding.’ A transcript of the video Jonathan Haidt showed his class can be read here, and a transcript of the apology he offered his class the next day can be found here. A subsequent investigation by the university’s Office of Equal Opportunity found no evidence of wrongdoing. But, rather than being put off by this brush with reputational disaster, Haidt became fascinated by the problem of hypersensitivity at university. “It’s a crazy time, but it’s also a fascinating time to be a social scientist,” he has since remarked, “It’s the dawn of a new religion, and I study moral psychology as though religion, politics, even sports, they’re all manifestations of a tribalism.”Tuesday, 6 April 2021
What the F*ck & IDW
Sources differ on the nature of the IDW, with some describing it as left, and others as ideologically diverse, but nonetheless united against primary adversaries hailing predominantly from progressives, including postmodernism, post-structuralism, Marxism, and political correctness. Psychology Today characterized it as "generally concerned about political tribalism and free speech", or as a rejection of "mainstream assumptions about what is true". Salon dubbed it a politically conservative movement united more over a rejection of American liberalism than over any mutually shared beliefs. Alternatively, the National Review posited that, despite comprising "all political persuasions", the IDW was united in a particular conservative-leaning conceptualization of injustice and inequality specifically.
In his book Against the Web: A Cosmopolitan Answer to the New Right, author and political commentator Michael Brooks lists a "devotion to affirming capitalism", a "shared obsession with campus and social media controversies" and an "intense interest in IQ and other innate justifications for systemic inequalities" as defining features of the group.
In his book Against the Web: A Cosmopolitan Answer to the New Right, author and political commentator Michael Brooks lists a "devotion to affirming capitalism", a "shared obsession with campus and social media controversies" and an "intense interest in IQ and other innate justifications for systemic inequalities" as defining features of the group.
The term "intellectual dark web" was coined by the American venture capitalist, Eric Weinstein. His term, which metaphorically compared opposition to mainstream opinion to what is illicitly found on the dark web, was not intended to be wholly serious. It was then popularized in a 2018 New York Times editorial by American opinion writer Bari Weiss. Weiss and others applied the term to a broad range of figures from various parts of the political spectrum, including conservatives such as Ben Shapiro and Douglas Murray, liberals such as Maajid Nawaz and Sam Harris, and feminists like Ayaan Hirsi Ali. It has also been linked to online publications such as the libertarian-leaning Quillette.
These thinkers and publications expressed concern at what they regarded as increasingly authoritarian tendencies within progressive movements in Western countries, namely attempts to censure, fire, or intimidate those expressing views contrary to orthodox progressive views on identity politics, especially within universities and the news media. They often linked these to the growing influence of critical theory and the critical social justice movement—themselves influenced by Marxism and postmodernism—on mainstream progressive thought. These IDW figures regarded such tendencies as a threat to freedom of speech and believed that their growth promoted divisive social tribalism. While sharing common concerns, those labelled part of the IDW diverge on other issues, lacking any leadership or central organization. Given this diversity of thought, the validity of the term has been critiqued by some of those who have been labelled as its members.
Criticism of ideas associated with the IDW has come primarily from progressive and left-wing commentators. These critics have argued that the IDW seeks to intellectually legitimize social inequalities and overstates the harm caused by phenomena such as cancel culture and progressive identity politics. Some progressive critics have also alleged links between the IDW and far-right movements like the alt-right, even though various IDW figures have spoken out against
Bari Weiss' New York Times article (titled "Meet the Renegades of the Intellectual Dark Web") sparked a number of critiques. Jonah Goldberg, writing in the National Review, said the "label is a bit overwrought", writing that it struck him "as a marketing label — and not necessarily a good one: ...it seems to me this IDW thing isn't actually an intellectual movement. It’s just a coalition of thinkers and journalists who happen to share a disdain for the keepers of the liberal orthodoxy." Henry Farrell, writing in Vox, expressed disbelief that conservative commentator Ben Shapiro or neuroscientist Sam Harris, both claimed to be among the intellectual dark web by Weiss, could credibly be described as either purged or silenced. Weiss' fellow New York Times columnist Paul Krugman noted the irony of claiming popular intellectual oppression by the mainstream, while publishing in the Times, among the most prominent newspapers in the nation. David A. French contended many of the critics were missing the point, and were instead inadvertently confirming "the need for a movement of intellectual free-thinkers."
Sunday, 31 January 2021
∞ Cognitive Forays
Demise of Weakism? ..
Fact-Based Rationality vs Weakism ..
Human Nature, Individualism & Morality ..
Tuesday, 26 January 2021
Thursday, 21 January 2021
Wednesday, 13 January 2021
Personal Bias and Tribalism
Julia Galef is author of the Scout Mindset and host of the Rationally Speaking Podcast
Post-Modernist Dismissal of Information
.
24-5-25 Postmodernism and Its Impact, Explained - Quillette > .⇑ Warning: poor sound quality, irritating muzak (better to read the original)
Jacques Derrida w
Jean Baudrillard w
2020 Myth of a Free Press: Media Bias Explained - TomN > .Project MKUltra: The CIA's Attempt at Psychedelic Mind Control - xplrd > .
What the Theory? - TomN >> .How French “Intellectuals” Ruined the West: Postmodernism and Its Impact, Explained areo
27/03/2017 17 minute read Helen Pluckrose
27/03/2017 17 minute read Helen Pluckrose
"Our current crisis is not one of Left versus Right but of consistency, reason, humility and universal liberalism versus inconsistency, irrationalism, zealous certainty and tribal authoritarianism. The future of freedom, equality and justice looks equally bleak whether the postmodern Left or the post-truth Right wins this current war. Those of us who value liberal democracy and the fruits of the Enlightenment and Scientific Revolution and modernity itself must provide a better option." – Helen Pluckrose
Shorter version:
https://quillette.com/2024/05/07/how-french-intellectuals-ruined-the-west-foucault-lyotard-derrida/
https://quillette.com/2024/05/07/how-french-intellectuals-ruined-the-west-foucault-lyotard-derrida/
Monday, 11 January 2021
Rashomon Effect
.
Rashomon Effect = where individuals give significantly different but equally believable accounts of the same event.
The Rashomon effect has been defined in a modern academic context as "the naming of an epistemological framework—or ways of thinking, knowing, and remembering—required for understanding complex and ambiguous situations".
The history of the term and its permutations in cinema, literature, legal studies, psychology, sociology, and history is the subject of a 2015 multi-author volume edited by Blair Davis, Robert Anderson and Jan Walls.
Valerie Alia termed the same effect "The Rashomon Principle" and has used this variant extensively since the late 1970s, first publishing it in an essay on the politics of journalism in 1982. She developed the term in a 1997 essay "The Rashomon Principle: The Journalist as Ethnographer" and in her 2004 book, Media Ethics and Social Change.
A useful demonstration of this principle in scientific understanding can be found in Karl G. Heider's 1988 journal article on ethnography. Heider used the term to refer to the effect of the subjectivity of perception on recollection, by which observers of an event are able to produce substantially different but equally plausible accounts of it.
In The Australian Institute for Progress Ltd v The Electoral Commission of Queensland & Ors (No 2), Applegarth J wrote that:
The Rashomon effect describes how parties describe an event in a different and contradictory manner, which reflects their subjective interpretation and self-interested advocacy, rather than an objective truth. The Rashomon effect is evident when the event is the outcome of litigation. One should not be surprised when both parties claim to have won the case.Unreliable narrator .
Blind men and an elephant .
Virumaandi .
Rashomon .
Sunday, 10 January 2021
Stupidity - Functional Underperformance
2010 Danger of science denial | Michael Specter > .
24-2-15 Real DEI (PRA) Program [Divisive Extremist Ideology] - New Discources > .
DISinformation Explosion - Alētheiai >> .
DISinformation, Fakery - Fallax >> .
Unforseen Consequences - Fallax >> .
Unforseen Consequences - Fallax >> .
Truth-Telling >> .
Why some of the smartest [and most of the slower] people can be so very stupid:
In at least some cases, intelligence actively abets stupidity by allowing pernicious rationalisation.
-
"What exactly is stupidity? How does it relate to morality: can you be morally good and stupid, for example? How does it relate to vice: is stupidity a kind of prejudice, perhaps? And why is it so domain-specific: why are people often stupid in one area and insightful in another?
...
Stupidity is a very specific cognitive failing. Crudely put, it occurs when you don’t have the right conceptual tools for the job. The result is an inability to make sense of what is happening and a resulting tendency to force phenomena into crude, distorting pigeonholes.
-Stupidity is a very specific cognitive failing. Crudely put, it occurs when you don’t have the right conceptual tools for the job. The result is an inability to make sense of what is happening and a resulting tendency to force phenomena into crude, distorting pigeonholes.
In at least some cases, intelligence actively abets stupidity by allowing pernicious rationalisation.
-
Stupidity will often arise when an outdated conceptual framework is forced into service, mangling the user’s grip on some new phenomenon. It is important to distinguish this from mere error. We make mistakes for all kinds of reasons. Stupidity is rather one specific and stubborn cause of error."
...
Stupidity is also compatible with a kind of misguided innovation such as the [attempted imposition or] overly optimistic importation of conceptual tools from a very different place....
"Stupidity has two features that make it particularly dangerous when compared with other vices. First, unlike character flaws, stupidity [as used by the author] is primarily a property of groups or traditions, not individuals: after all, we get most of our concepts, our mental tools, from the society we are raised in. Once stupidity [such as religion] has taken hold of a group or society, it is thus particularly hard to eradicate – inventing, distributing and normalising new concepts is tough work.-
Dumbness alone is rarely the driving threat: at the head of almost every dumb movement, you will find the stupid in charge.
-
Dumbness alone is rarely the driving threat: at the head of almost every dumb movement, you will find the stupid in charge.
-
Second, stupidity begets more stupidity due to a profound ambiguity in its nature. If stupidity is a matter of the wrong tools for the job, whether an action is stupid will depend on what the job is; just as a hammer is perfect for some tasks and wrong for others. Take politics, where stupidity is particularly catching: a stupid slogan [MAGA, "Lock Her Up"] chimes with a stupid voter, it mirrors the way they see the world. The result is that stupidity can, ironically, be extremely effective in the right [a favorable] environment: a kind of incapacity is in effect being selected for. It is vital to separate this point from familiar and condescending claims about how dumb or uneducated the ‘other side’ are: stupidity is compatible with high educational achievement, and it is more the property of a political culture than of the individuals in it, needing to be tackled at that level."
Tuesday, 24 November 2020
Evangelical Science vs Political Religionism
.Evangelical Scientist Busts Myths on Christianity & Climate Crisis > .
22-5-21 Religious Extremists Mix tRUMP Worship With "Christian" Nationalism > .
Katharine Hayhoe is the co-director of the Climate Center at Texas Tech University and the co-founder of Science Moms, an organization formed by climate scientist moms ‘to help mothers who are concerned about their childrens’ planet.’ She’s also an evangelical Christian.
Katharine Hayhoe is the co-director of the Climate Center at Texas Tech University and the co-founder of Science Moms, an organization formed by climate scientist moms ‘to help mothers who are concerned about their childrens’ planet.’ She’s also an evangelical Christian.
Hayhoe says she cares about climate change because she’s Christian and that it’s been hard being both a Christian and a vocal climate scientist. But she says that the scientific community has welcomed her with open arms, and some have even told her that they share her faith.
Thursday, 23 July 2020
False-Balance Media Bias
2021 The Media Bias Nobody is Talking About | Robert Reich > .
Robert Reich breaks down how the mainstream media draws a false equivalence between the right wrong and the left and misleads the public about what's really at stake. The mainstream media has historically tried to balance left and right wrong in its political coverage, and present what it views as a reasonable center. That may sound good in theory. But the old politics no longer exists and the former labels “left” versus “right” are outdated. Today it’s democracy versus authoritarianism, voting rights versus white supremacy. There’s no reasonable center between these positions, no justifiable compromise. Equating them is misleading and dangerous. Don't fall for it.
The Real Political Battle in America ►► https://youtu.be/hkM_NG6HkqY .
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)