6 ms·
This is a fascinating proof of its own conjecture. The author bashes "tribal epistemology" while enthusiastically engaging in it. I think people experiencing th
by ewzimm 9y ago
This is a fascinating proof of its own conjecture. The author bashes "tribal epistemology" while enthusiastically engaging in it. I think people experiencing this kind of fear should consider reading Jonathan Haidt's "The Righteous Mind" for more insight into why conservatives seem so obtuse. I found one of the relevant sections in this blog, which also seems informative in general:
>...it allowed us to assess how accurate they were by comparing people’s expectations about “typical” partisans to the actual responses from partisans on the left and the right)’ Who was best able to pretend to be the other?
>The results were clear and consistent. Moderates and conservatives were most accurate in their predictions, whether they were pretending to be liberals or conservatives. Liberals were the least accurate, especially those who described themselves as “very liberal.” The biggest errors in the whole study came when liberals answered the Care and Fairness questions while pretending to be conservatives.
https://theindependentwhig.com/haidt-passages/haidt/conservatives-understand-liberals-better-than-liberals-understand-conservatives/ https://theindependentwhig.com/haidt-passages/haidt/conserva...
- yedava 9y agoWhere do the examples cited in Vox piece fit in Haidt's framework? Is 'Pizzagate' an accurate prediction? Was Obama really born outside the US? Did protesters at Columbia University actually support pedophilia?
- ewzimm 9y agoThis is where tribal understanding comes in. “Pizzagate” has proven to be accurate by the understanding of its proponents. The name is a joke, and it really has nothing to do with pizza; the basic premise of it is that there are pedophiles hiding in positions of power and privilege. Just about everyone knew Comet Pizza was a stretch from the beginning. People tend not to look at nuances and skepticism like this when faced with an opposing tribe’s position. In regards to Obama, most people really don’t care. It’s kind of a silly law about birth place anyway. As for the protestors, I think you will find that most people know not to trust every picture, and everything along those lines gets healthy skepticism from people on all sides of politics.
- platz 9y ago> shows the inability of a theater critic-who skillfully enters fantastical imaginary worlds for a living-to imagine that Republicans act within a moral matrix that differs from his own Or, the theatre critic is intentionally caricaturing and polarizing the other side in his efforts of persuasion. Too often we assume what people say is what they actually believe, when really they are trying to do 'spin' a more favorable narrative
- ewzimm 9y agoI think Haidt understands perfectly well that this is hyperbole, but it shows a severe lack of empathy even so.
- platz 9y agoHaidt should say he thinks it's hyperbole if he believes it so. Hrmm.. this is looking familiar
- ewzimm 9y ago“One of the many ironies” doesn’t only imply unintentional irony. You should note that Haidt is a liberal.
- platz 9y agoHow very charitable! I don't care whether he's Dem or Republican. The vox piece suffers from the same problem, which is why it probably got flagged. If the vox piece is dishonest in some ways too. The worst thing you can do is purport to explain someone else's mental state. Or attempt to explain some aspect of their internal psychology. No, respond to actions and events, do not try to read the tea leaves of some else's mind, because you will be tempted either consciously or unconsciously to read exactly what supports your narrative and rejects the opposing narrative
- ewzimm 9y ago