6 ms·
I believe this comes from confusion between freedom as a choice with consequences, and freedom as a choice without consequences. The latter definition has take
by chmod600 5y ago
I believe this comes from confusion between freedom as a choice with consequences, and freedom as a choice without consequences.
The latter definition has taken hold over the last few decades because it is seen as offensive to reinforce good choices. Suggesting that people maintain a good diet and exercise is seen as offensive to obese people. Suggesting that people marry a good, stable partner before having children is seen as offensive to single mothers. Suggesting that people focus on jobs and careers that provide stable income is seen as crushing someone's self-actualized aspirations. And suggesting that any of these groups be responsible for the outcomes of their choices is unthinkable.
When such basic advice is off-limits, what cultural infrastructure could we possibly have?
Edit: removed distracting example.
- mkr-hn 5y ago"is seen as" x 4 By who? I'm pretty sure they still teach the difference between passive and active voice in school. Passive voice is great if you want to paint in broad strokes without naming names so people can't actually discuss your points. This is choir-preaching. Or argument by implication if you want a secular term.
- lostdog 5y agoThe cultural infrastructure we had was extremely poor. We put a ton of focus into shaming and punishing people for bad behavior, and it just didn't work. Fat shaming has resulted in even more obese people. Punishing unmarried couples didn't increase the number of stable partnerships at all. We lost the war on drugs. I don't agree with the current trends either ("it's completely ok to do bad thing X!"). However, in addition to good advice for individuals, we need to keep trying to create cultural infrastructure that really does work.
- mkr-hn 5y agoI suspect the lower stress of acceptance, even when it goes overboard in cases where the thing can actually be harmful, still leads to better outcomes. Stress is a well-documented factor in weight gain, for example. My covid 19 after years of losing weight is proof! The loss came from self-acceptance. I stopped beating myself up when I slipped up, and I stopped letting other people shame me for it. That was good for 50 pounds, and I'm headed back down now that I'm vaccinated and getting as much back on track as I can. I don't have data handy, but I suspect shaming has killed more people and ruined more lives than acceptance.
- foolinaround 5y agoi think a carrot and stick approach would have worked. if the shaming is the stick, but where is the carrot? they should be provided alternatives and policies that prod towards the better options.
- rayiner 5y ago> Punishing unmarried couples didn't increase the number of stable partnerships at all. That’s a bad example. Family stability plummeted after the sexual revolution, even as access to birth control and abortion made family planning easier: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_parents_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_parents_in_the_United_S...
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- tptacek 5y agoI don't know that the sexual revolution correlation holds up as well as the liberalization of divorce laws, which precedes the sex stuff by a decade or more.
- ww2buff 5y agoI think it is a remarkable testament to your patience that you continue to treat this guy as if he is interested in arguing in good faith, and not as a hardcore ideologue & culture-warrior.
- tptacek 5y agoThis guy is one of the most valuable contributors to the site, all the more so because we disagree about so much politically; I have almost total faith that he means what he says, and, especially on politically-tinged topics (also compiler theory), tend to learn a lot from him. Always happy for the opportunity to say that, so thanks!