3 ms·

Group affiliation is a decent heuristic. It helps you to know what to look for when identifying whether there are concessions made to forward a larger agenda co

Group affiliation is a decent heuristic. It helps you to know what to look for when identifying whether there are concessions made to forward a larger agenda concealed within the text. I wouldn't dismiss the document out of hand by virtue of its author's social circles, but I also wouldn't say that suspicion is entirely unwarranted. Though the CFR is such a large organization, I would also be less immediately suspicious of its rank and file.

NovemberWhiskey 5y ago
>Group affiliation is a decent heuristic. It helps you to know what to look for when identifying whether there are concessions made to forward a larger agenda concealed within the text. That's exactly where the wheels come off. The implication is that individual ideas or policies should be valued based on whether they're part of a platform at the level of party politics or similar. So what if the idea is part of someone else's larger agenda? What exactly are we threatened by?
- crocodiletears 5y ago
  >So what if the idea is part of someone else's larger agenda? What exactly are we threatened by? If you disagree with the broader agenda or find that it is in conflict with your beliefs/interests you may be better served by pursuing alternative framings which don't depend on the priors of the the group with-which you find yourself in opposition. Just because you agree with the author's conclusion doesn't mean that their line of reasoning is parallel with yours, or that the assumptions and value judgements that they used to reach that conclusion don't logically unfold in an undesirable direction. Group affiliation can be a trigger and a compass to help you in that process. This doesn't mean that you have to disagree with them. It just means that you should take some extra time to understand both how and why.
rdiddly 5y ago
It fosters confirmation bias. You will tend to find whatever you're looking for.

NovemberWhiskey 5y ago

>Group affiliation is a decent heuristic. It helps you to know what to look for when identifying whether there are concessions made to forward a larger agenda concealed within the text. That's exactly where the wheels come off. The implication is that individual ideas or policies should be valued based on whether they're part of a platform at the level of party politics or similar. So what if the idea is part of someone else's larger agenda? What exactly are we threatened by?

crocodiletears 5y ago
>So what if the idea is part of someone else's larger agenda? What exactly are we threatened by? If you disagree with the broader agenda or find that it is in conflict with your beliefs/interests you may be better served by pursuing alternative framings which don't depend on the priors of the the group with-which you find yourself in opposition. Just because you agree with the author's conclusion doesn't mean that their line of reasoning is parallel with yours, or that the assumptions and value judgements that they used to reach that conclusion don't logically unfold in an undesirable direction. Group affiliation can be a trigger and a compass to help you in that process. This doesn't mean that you have to disagree with them. It just means that you should take some extra time to understand both how and why.

rdiddly 5y ago

It fosters confirmation bias. You will tend to find whatever you're looking for.