5 ms·

You're getting downvoted, but I can't tell why. Maybe you've offended both sides by contending that their side is as guilty as the other of ideological reasonin

You're getting downvoted, but I can't tell why. Maybe you've offended both sides by contending that their side is as guilty as the other of ideological reasoning?! :) EDIT: Wow, someone downvoted me literally ~2 seconds after I posted. Good work, Quickdraw!

stcredzero 8y ago
You're getting downvoted, but I can't tell why. Maybe you've offended both sides by contending that their side is as guilty as the other of ideological reasoning?! :) There is a big part of online society for whom such jingoistic tribalism is thought of as some sort of virtuous, intellectually worthy exercise. I find this highly disturbing. If one is interested in finding the truth, then self doubt and the willingness to ask questions is paramount! It's precisely that "you're either with us, or against us" mentality which is a hallmark of the tyrants and the enemies of reason. It's precisely that mindset that burned witches and imprisoned Galileo. It's precisely that mindset that gives rise to ideological reasoning. EDIT: Wow, someone downvoted me literally ~2 seconds after I posted. Good work, Quickdraw! It seems like some group of activists has tried to come in to Hacker News and use it to push their agenda. I, for one, do not appreciate their attempts to push their agenda by creating fear of being labeled an "-ist."
- p1necone 8y ago
  >>> It seems like some group of activists has tried to come in to Hacker News and use it to push their agenda. I, for one, do not appreciate their attempts to push their agenda by creating fear of being labeled an "-ist." Was the irony here intentional? ;)
  - stcredzero 8y ago
    Was the irony here intentional? ;) I've been around here since 2007, and I'm even on the leaderboard. There has indeed been a sharp change around here, starting slowly in 2014 and more quickly starting in 2016. This sort of outrage-mongering and "you're with us or you're against us, or we'll smear you" anti-intellectual mentality on HN is something new that's come in from outside.
vkou 8y ago
I imagine that they were downvoted for mentioning "Both sides." It is correct in this case, but in other contexts, it is also a common bit of fallacious reasoning, used to draw false equivalences.
- stcredzero 8y ago
  It's not a fallacy in the case where something does happen to apply to both sides. As far as I am concerned, "both sides" in any debate are human beings, subject to human foibles.
- p1necone 8y ago
  I groan every time I hear someone say "both sides", as if it's just not possible for there to be a simple right answer sometimes. Remember "teach the controversy"? Edit: not to say that pointing out that "both sides" have some sort of mistake is never valid, it's just that almost every time I see the argument it's from someone akin to a flat earther, or climate change denier, or an anti-evolutionist, who really doesn't have the facts on their side. And it's incredibly frustrating that they just expect me to respect their opinions just as much as I would respect someone who's talking points hadn't been debunked over and over already.
  - weberc2 8y ago
    I agree, but I think “both sides” has merit when one side is trying to position themselves as champions of reason across the board. It simply isn’t true for any major political ideology (in America, anyway).
    - freshhawk 8y ago
      But you can use reason to work out that if people with different subjective values use perfect reason to choose their political opinions they will often end up disagreeing. So it isn't true for anyone (in this universe, anyway).
  - pl1234 8y ago
    most people here turn flat-earther level stupid when it comes to evolution applied to humans. They don't fully believe in evolution. They are often the same people who will make fun of flat-earthers. To anyone aware of racial realities, this forum looks like a flat-earth society
anigbrowl 8y ago
I'm guessing it was the both sides thing, which assumes a binary opposition as a starting premise when many issues are multidimensional. The downvotes on your own comment may be because one of the HN guidelines discourages commenting about voting patterns.
- weberc2 8y ago
  The issues are multifaceted but our society is largely and increasingly divided in two. I would love for it not to be, but my aspirations alone don’t change reality. And I thought the fact that the downvote was there as soon as I posted was the remarkable bit, not that I was downvoted at all.
  - freshhawk 8y ago
    But the biggest not-a-trump-tweet political story of the last year is the massive shift of american politics into left-wing, centrist and right-wing groups as the effect of Trump getting elected ripples through both parties. Saying this during an era that looks like it will be partly remembered as when the american binary political divide ended seems very odd to me. American society is largely and increasingly not well modeled by 2 clusters of opinion.
    - stcredzero 8y ago
      I really hope you're correct about a centrist group forming. One of the huge distortions of American politics, is that the center isn't explicitly represented, though that's the actual politics that runs everything. American society is largely and increasingly not well modeled by 2 clusters of opinion. I've seen studies and polls indicating that there are two diverging clusters of opinions and positions, with the left part moving further left, and the right clump moving more slowly right.
freshhawk 8y ago
Could be because "My values/beliefs are the ideology free centre and everyone else is ideological" is the most common and boring ideology in North America. Even the idea that politics involves "2 sides" or that this is a useful way to model things is an obvious ideological statement. Pointing this out gets old, at this point jokes about how someone always says this and betrays their complete misunderstanding of the entire concept is old. And since you know this ideology and you know what works and what doesn't when trying to get someone to confront un-examined ideological commitments ... you just downvote and move on.

stcredzero 8y ago

You're getting downvoted, but I can't tell why. Maybe you've offended both sides by contending that their side is as guilty as the other of ideological reasoning?! :) There is a big part of online society for whom such jingoistic tribalism is thought of as some sort of virtuous, intellectually worthy exercise. I find this highly disturbing. If one is interested in finding the truth, then self doubt and the willingness to ask questions is paramount! It's precisely that "you're either with us, or against us" mentality which is a hallmark of the tyrants and the enemies of reason. It's precisely that mindset that burned witches and imprisoned Galileo. It's precisely that mindset that gives rise to ideological reasoning. EDIT: Wow, someone downvoted me literally ~2 seconds after I posted. Good work, Quickdraw! It seems like some group of activists has tried to come in to Hacker News and use it to push their agenda. I, for one, do not appreciate their attempts to push their agenda by creating fear of being labeled an "-ist."

p1necone 8y ago
>>> It seems like some group of activists has tried to come in to Hacker News and use it to push their agenda. I, for one, do not appreciate their attempts to push their agenda by creating fear of being labeled an "-ist." Was the irony here intentional? ;)
- stcredzero 8y ago
  Was the irony here intentional? ;) I've been around here since 2007, and I'm even on the leaderboard. There has indeed been a sharp change around here, starting slowly in 2014 and more quickly starting in 2016. This sort of outrage-mongering and "you're with us or you're against us, or we'll smear you" anti-intellectual mentality on HN is something new that's come in from outside.

vkou 8y ago

I imagine that they were downvoted for mentioning "Both sides." It is correct in this case, but in other contexts, it is also a common bit of fallacious reasoning, used to draw false equivalences.

stcredzero 8y ago
It's not a fallacy in the case where something does happen to apply to both sides. As far as I am concerned, "both sides" in any debate are human beings, subject to human foibles.
p1necone 8y ago
I groan every time I hear someone say "both sides", as if it's just not possible for there to be a simple right answer sometimes. Remember "teach the controversy"? Edit: not to say that pointing out that "both sides" have some sort of mistake is never valid, it's just that almost every time I see the argument it's from someone akin to a flat earther, or climate change denier, or an anti-evolutionist, who really doesn't have the facts on their side. And it's incredibly frustrating that they just expect me to respect their opinions just as much as I would respect someone who's talking points hadn't been debunked over and over already.
- weberc2 8y ago
  I agree, but I think “both sides” has merit when one side is trying to position themselves as champions of reason across the board. It simply isn’t true for any major political ideology (in America, anyway).
  - freshhawk 8y ago
    But you can use reason to work out that if people with different subjective values use perfect reason to choose their political opinions they will often end up disagreeing. So it isn't true for anyone (in this universe, anyway).
- pl1234 8y ago
  most people here turn flat-earther level stupid when it comes to evolution applied to humans. They don't fully believe in evolution. They are often the same people who will make fun of flat-earthers. To anyone aware of racial realities, this forum looks like a flat-earth society

anigbrowl 8y ago

I'm guessing it was the both sides thing, which assumes a binary opposition as a starting premise when many issues are multidimensional. The downvotes on your own comment may be because one of the HN guidelines discourages commenting about voting patterns.

weberc2 8y ago
The issues are multifaceted but our society is largely and increasingly divided in two. I would love for it not to be, but my aspirations alone don’t change reality. And I thought the fact that the downvote was there as soon as I posted was the remarkable bit, not that I was downvoted at all.
- freshhawk 8y ago
  But the biggest not-a-trump-tweet political story of the last year is the massive shift of american politics into left-wing, centrist and right-wing groups as the effect of Trump getting elected ripples through both parties. Saying this during an era that looks like it will be partly remembered as when the american binary political divide ended seems very odd to me. American society is largely and increasingly not well modeled by 2 clusters of opinion.
  - stcredzero 8y ago
    I really hope you're correct about a centrist group forming. One of the huge distortions of American politics, is that the center isn't explicitly represented, though that's the actual politics that runs everything. American society is largely and increasingly not well modeled by 2 clusters of opinion. I've seen studies and polls indicating that there are two diverging clusters of opinions and positions, with the left part moving further left, and the right clump moving more slowly right.

freshhawk 8y ago

Could be because "My values/beliefs are the ideology free centre and everyone else is ideological" is the most common and boring ideology in North America. Even the idea that politics involves "2 sides" or that this is a useful way to model things is an obvious ideological statement. Pointing this out gets old, at this point jokes about how someone always says this and betrays their complete misunderstanding of the entire concept is old. And since you know this ideology and you know what works and what doesn't when trying to get someone to confront un-examined ideological commitments ... you just downvote and move on.