5 ms·

Calling it virtue signaling is a cheap way to dismiss something. Virtue signaling is when a person trumpets their moral stance without a willingness to make an

Calling it virtue signaling is a cheap way to dismiss something. Virtue signaling is when a person trumpets their moral stance without a willingness to make any significant investment in it. This guy investing 10,000 hours into the project disqualifies it from that moniker.

criddell 7y ago
So people who buy a Prius are never virtue signalling?
- pwinnski 7y ago
  Conversely, are people who buy a Prius always virtue signaling? Perhaps the appellation is an empty way to dismiss someone without engaging them?
  - criddell 7y ago
    > are people who buy a Prius always virtue signaling? Of course not. I was simply responding to the idea that a significant investment is all it takes to counter the claim that some activity is virtue signaling.
    - romwell 7y ago
      "Significant" is a relative term. Buying a Prius vs. buying a non-Prius is hardly a significant investment for people who make that choice. I guess the more proper word here would be sacrifice, something you never get back.
  - b_tterc_p 7y ago
    I meant to imply the consumers of his stuff were most likely virtue signaling. Not he himself. Your phrasing implies that dismissing someone without engaging someone is a bad thing. On the contrary it’s recognizing that most people’s opinions are based on nothing but their sense of community identity and aren’t worth engaging at all.
- matt-attack 7y ago
  There’s no incremental cost to choosing a Prius. So yes they can easily be signaling. They have to have a car so you can’t the case that “they spent $30k so they must be authentic”.
  - tasty_freeze 7y ago
    I'm 3 days late to respond to this because I was out of action for a few days. For the great majority of people $30,000 is a non-trivial investment, one they must live with for years. Other than buying a house or having children, it is the most expensive thing most people will buy. (ignore the exact dollar figures below .. I'm not car literate, but hopefully you'll get the idea). Say someone bought a Mazda Miata, did the paperwork, and the dealer then sent them home in a Prius. What are the odds they would shrug and say, "Oh, ok, one $30K car is the same as any other $30K car." Zero. If the had wanted a Prius he would have bought the Prius, but he valued the Miata higher. In your scenario, the Prius buyer really wanted a different car, but was willing to buy the Prius because they wanted the world to think they were green. Fine ... but then they gave up something of value to make the statement: they will not to get to drive the car they really desired. Is it really so impossible to imagine that someone would truly prefer to buy a Prius on its merits and not because it is making a statement?
- Ambele 7y ago
  Along similar lines, what do you signal when you make $1200/mo truck payments on a new $80k truck for commuting back and forth to your $55k tech 9-5 job because "you like trucks"?

criddell 7y ago

So people who buy a Prius are never virtue signalling?

pwinnski 7y ago
Conversely, are people who buy a Prius always virtue signaling? Perhaps the appellation is an empty way to dismiss someone without engaging them?
- criddell 7y ago
  > are people who buy a Prius always virtue signaling? Of course not. I was simply responding to the idea that a significant investment is all it takes to counter the claim that some activity is virtue signaling.
  - romwell 7y ago
    "Significant" is a relative term. Buying a Prius vs. buying a non-Prius is hardly a significant investment for people who make that choice. I guess the more proper word here would be sacrifice, something you never get back.
- b_tterc_p 7y ago
  I meant to imply the consumers of his stuff were most likely virtue signaling. Not he himself. Your phrasing implies that dismissing someone without engaging someone is a bad thing. On the contrary it’s recognizing that most people’s opinions are based on nothing but their sense of community identity and aren’t worth engaging at all.
matt-attack 7y ago
There’s no incremental cost to choosing a Prius. So yes they can easily be signaling. They have to have a car so you can’t the case that “they spent $30k so they must be authentic”.
- tasty_freeze 7y ago
  I'm 3 days late to respond to this because I was out of action for a few days. For the great majority of people $30,000 is a non-trivial investment, one they must live with for years. Other than buying a house or having children, it is the most expensive thing most people will buy. (ignore the exact dollar figures below .. I'm not car literate, but hopefully you'll get the idea). Say someone bought a Mazda Miata, did the paperwork, and the dealer then sent them home in a Prius. What are the odds they would shrug and say, "Oh, ok, one $30K car is the same as any other $30K car." Zero. If the had wanted a Prius he would have bought the Prius, but he valued the Miata higher. In your scenario, the Prius buyer really wanted a different car, but was willing to buy the Prius because they wanted the world to think they were green. Fine ... but then they gave up something of value to make the statement: they will not to get to drive the car they really desired. Is it really so impossible to imagine that someone would truly prefer to buy a Prius on its merits and not because it is making a statement?
Ambele 7y ago
Along similar lines, what do you signal when you make $1200/mo truck payments on a new $80k truck for commuting back and forth to your $55k tech 9-5 job because "you like trucks"?