4 ms·

This kind of role-playing is a big part of certain types of education. It's basically the whole point of model UN and various games-based massive exercises that

This kind of role-playing is a big part of certain types of education. It's basically the whole point of model UN and various games-based massive exercises that kids with a serious interest in government or international relations or whatever usually end up participating in during secondary school. Asking a student to take a perspective and work from there is not remotely the same thing as endorsing that perspective and it'd be crippling to take away that tool or only use it to examine "acceptable" perspectives. [EDIT] I should add that it's incredibly powerful and probably under-used outside the Poli-Sci department and perhaps business schools. Trying it for, say, some position you aspire to, like development lead or CTO, for example (I've been hired, it's day one, orientation's over, what do I do first? What's important? Who do I talk to? What info do I need? Who has it? What systems might exist to get it? How should I present myself to others in various positions?) can quickly expose gaps in your knowledge or education, suggesting what to focus on first to get there. You can also use it to figure out how to interact with people in other positions to be as helpful to them as possible while keeping them off your back (because you're giving them what they need to do their job) especially if they're not great at what they do. It's damn useful.

eesmith 7y ago
Why does it need to be so conformist with the existing power structure? That is, when this came up on August, one commenter at https://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2019/08/29/but-it-isnt-even-a-question/#comment-2009081 https://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2019/08/29/but-it-is... posed a roughly equivalent problem: > “you’ve just overthrown the government in a socialist workers’ uprising. The royal family and all members of the nobility have been executed by firing squad. As the recently elected chairman of the Greater London Soviet, explain why this was both necessary and moral.” Surely that's equally "acceptable" perspective for a role-playing exercise, yes? In your edit you commented that it's an exercise for practicing for "some position you aspire to". Doesn't that imply that someone who aspires to be a PM should practice concocting excuses to explain why it was "both necessary and moral" to kill protestors? Wouldn't better practice for a PM in this case to be to express sorrow about the deaths, announce the start of an independent investigation into the issue (and not be people with ties to the government), etc.? Doesn't this sort of exercise also reduce the number of people who enter political science simply because they don't want to spend time to defend a some positions they believe to be unconscionable? I took a foreign language class once and we were asked to practice by having a debate on some topic. I don't remember what it was, so let's say "for or against smoking in public restaurants". I was assigned the task of defending the ability to smoke in a restaurant - something I am very much against - and refused to do it. Just like a social activist teenager with a history of going to demonstrations might be against needing to justify the morality of killing protestors. Or the teenager from the ranks of nobility might not want to justify killing his or her family for the needs of the Greater London Soviet.

eesmith 7y ago

Why does it need to be so conformist with the existing power structure? That is, when this came up on August, one commenter at https://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2019/08/29/but-it-isnt-even-a-question/#comment-2009081 https://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2019/08/29/but-it-is... posed a roughly equivalent problem: > “you’ve just overthrown the government in a socialist workers’ uprising. The royal family and all members of the nobility have been executed by firing squad. As the recently elected chairman of the Greater London Soviet, explain why this was both necessary and moral.” Surely that's equally "acceptable" perspective for a role-playing exercise, yes? In your edit you commented that it's an exercise for practicing for "some position you aspire to". Doesn't that imply that someone who aspires to be a PM should practice concocting excuses to explain why it was "both necessary and moral" to kill protestors? Wouldn't better practice for a PM in this case to be to express sorrow about the deaths, announce the start of an independent investigation into the issue (and not be people with ties to the government), etc.? Doesn't this sort of exercise also reduce the number of people who enter political science simply because they don't want to spend time to defend a some positions they believe to be unconscionable? I took a foreign language class once and we were asked to practice by having a debate on some topic. I don't remember what it was, so let's say "for or against smoking in public restaurants". I was assigned the task of defending the ability to smoke in a restaurant - something I am very much against - and refused to do it. Just like a social activist teenager with a history of going to demonstrations might be against needing to justify the morality of killing protestors. Or the teenager from the ranks of nobility might not want to justify killing his or her family for the needs of the Greater London Soviet.