5 ms·

Fantastic article, and more relevant than ever. The trick is to remember you're no less subject to these impulses than "the other side", and then to remind you

Fantastic article, and more relevant than ever. The trick is to remember you're no less subject to these impulses than "the other side", and then to remind yourself daily.

smt88 6y ago
> The trick is to remember you're no less subject to these impulses than "the other side" Why would that be true? Do you think that tolerance (on any dimension) is a constant across humanity? Do you think that no group stratifies according to tolerance on some dimension? We have groups of people intolerant of race. There's no reason to be confident that "both sides" of opposing ideologies would be the same on any dimension without even specifying what those ideologies are.
- refurb 6y ago
  I interpreted that comment to not be “all groups are equally as tolerant”, but more that “you have subconscious impulses that drive your tolerance or lack thereof”, just like those outgroups you criticize for being intolerant.
  - smt88 6y ago
    That's absolutely true. But why wouldn't magnitude matter? Or the dimension on which you're intolerant? The comment I replied to just seems to be a "both sides are the same" type of comment that attempts to wipe out the nuance of the discourse.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
    - Dracophoenix 6y ago
      Magnitude depends on a combination of both prior and current circumstance, personal assumptions, learned experience perceived or real. There might also be some genetic element involved, but I digress. Because of this, tolerance (or quanta of tolerance) is subject to an iterative prisoner's dilemma subject to the sometimes irrational form of pattern matching. Even if we all used the same coordinate system for tolerance, the quadrants for tolerable and intolerable will differ in both scope and magnitude.
    - Wolfenstein98k 6y ago
      When you figure out the secret for knowing you're right and they're wrong - objectively, such that you could prove it and none could deny it - let everyone else know. Both sides think they have the facts on their side. I'm not saying you personally are wrong, but the odds are stacked heavily against you, and the point is you have no way of knowing when you're right, and at least some of the time you'll be wrong. And you'll be more certain than ever in the latter case. This doesn't "wipe out nuance", it encourages nuance, because it encourages humility and curiousity when it's needed most.

Fantastic article, and more relevant than ever. The trick is to remember you're no less subject to these impulses than "the other side", and then to remind yourself daily.

smt88 6y ago

> The trick is to remember you're no less subject to these impulses than "the other side" Why would that be true? Do you think that tolerance (on any dimension) is a constant across humanity? Do you think that no group stratifies according to tolerance on some dimension? We have groups of people intolerant of race. There's no reason to be confident that "both sides" of opposing ideologies would be the same on any dimension without even specifying what those ideologies are.

refurb 6y ago
I interpreted that comment to not be “all groups are equally as tolerant”, but more that “you have subconscious impulses that drive your tolerance or lack thereof”, just like those outgroups you criticize for being intolerant.
- smt88 6y ago
  That's absolutely true. But why wouldn't magnitude matter? Or the dimension on which you're intolerant? The comment I replied to just seems to be a "both sides are the same" type of comment that attempts to wipe out the nuance of the discourse.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - Dracophoenix 6y ago
    Magnitude depends on a combination of both prior and current circumstance, personal assumptions, learned experience perceived or real. There might also be some genetic element involved, but I digress. Because of this, tolerance (or quanta of tolerance) is subject to an iterative prisoner's dilemma subject to the sometimes irrational form of pattern matching. Even if we all used the same coordinate system for tolerance, the quadrants for tolerable and intolerable will differ in both scope and magnitude.
  - Wolfenstein98k 6y ago
    When you figure out the secret for knowing you're right and they're wrong - objectively, such that you could prove it and none could deny it - let everyone else know. Both sides think they have the facts on their side. I'm not saying you personally are wrong, but the odds are stacked heavily against you, and the point is you have no way of knowing when you're right, and at least some of the time you'll be wrong. And you'll be more certain than ever in the latter case. This doesn't "wipe out nuance", it encourages nuance, because it encourages humility and curiousity when it's needed most.