5 ms·

It's really a shame people turned virtue signaling into a dirty world that can't be used in civil discussion. It is a great descriptor for all sorts of human b

It's really a shame people turned virtue signaling into a dirty world that can't be used in civil discussion. It is a great descriptor for all sorts of human behavior in all sorts of contexts. Edit: y'all are kind of proving my first point.

phpisthebest 4y ago
I am not aware of a context where virtue signaling would be a good practice or behavior.
- throwaway0a5e 4y ago
  I meant it's a useful and descriptive term. I abhor the behavior.
- Zachsa999 4y ago
  I like too think a virtuous person signals virtue without being narcissistic
- erybodyknows 4y ago
  Virtue can be practiced and even observed without being signalled.
  - tsol 4y ago
    Practicing virtue in public, even if you don't intend it that way, is signaling virtue. What is strange is how in our society virtue has to be justified. Is it virtue signaling that people dislike, or being fake?
- afavour 4y ago
  Perhaps we're working to different definitions of the term. To me, virtue signaling is signaling (i.e. making publicly known) a virtuous act. To me that seems like an unambiguously good thing: it is likely to inspire others to similar virtuous acts, creating a feedback loop of people encouraging others to engage in good behaviour. "I voted! You should get out and vote too" feels like an example of positive virtual signaling. Broadly speaking, I think there is nothing wrong with, say, videoing yourself serving food at a soup kitchen. It's when you use that video to boost your own profile rather than the virtuous act that it becomes problematic. There are plenty of people that do that. However there are also plenty of people who interpret any public record of virtue as being inherently narcissistic and I think that's just as bad.
  - vinyl7 4y ago
    The problem with public displays of virtue is that it comes off as seeking return value for the action. Virtuous acts should be done in quiet/secret and for the simple reason for it being virtuous. Seeking some other sort of value out of it (like social recognition, social credit, youtube views which end up with ad revenue) makes the act look dishonest. The act wasn't done because they were a nice person, the act was done because they were seeking to increase their own value. The way to go about this is to do the thing without anyone knowing and without displaying it. To do it without expecting any personal gain at all. If a friend tells their friend "afavour brought me soup when I was sick, it was so sweet of them" or if someone asks you what you do in your spare time and you say "sometimes I serve at a soup kitchen." then that's fine because that kind of display, which was prompted by other people, can't really be seen as you seeking to cash out the value of the virtuous act.
    - afavour 4y ago
      > it comes off as seeking return value for the action Surely that’s in the eye of the beholder? It is possible to interpret it that way, certainly. But applying the observers value judgement (i.e. how it comes off) onto the original actor seems unfair to me. Sometimes I feel like (and I don’t mean anything personal by this) we’re all cynical bastards these days so when we see someone do something genuinely altruistic we simply cannot process it as such and immediately seek a way to dismiss it as self-serving.
      - vinyl7 4y ago
        > But the people in the soup kitchen see me serving the food. Anyone walking by might see me in the window. The nuance here is that there's a difference being observed doing a kind act versus purposefully making it a public spectacle. I don't view people I observe doing something altruistic as self-seeking unless they try to "cash in" on it. I would see someone helping a person in need and think "how kind of them!" But then later, if I see an Instagram post from that person saying "There was this person in need of help and I went over there and did something about it", then it can be seen as self-seeking.
- goodpoint 4y ago
  Most people now use "virtue signaling" as as insult to quickly dismiss any person expressing ethical concerns.
  - goodpoint 4y ago
    The silent downvotes only prove my point.
- watwut 4y ago
  Virtue signaling has similar effect as vice signaling: it signals to others what you think is good thing to do. It is statement toward rest of word.
  - throwaway0a5e 4y ago
    The signal it sends is that appearances and whatnot matter more than actual substances, that appearing to do something is more important than doing something. Bragging about how your food is cruelty free when you don't really care about the food, you care about being able to say that it's cruelty free doesn't make you against animal cruelty except by some absurdly expansive definition of "against". And there's also 800lb gorilla that is political discourse where people routinely say one thing and then not only do nothing to advance that, they live their lives by something that's close to the opposite. Rewarding virtue signaling absolves people of much of the requirement to put their money where their mouth is and relaxing that requirement is a bad thing.
    - watwut 4y ago
      First paragraph care more about what whoever does that action feels then about what impact it has. All in all, it rewards primary doing and saying nothing. Everyone else can be accused of virtue signaling.
dools 4y ago
Virtue signalling is a term made up by a hard right libertarian propagandist writing for the spectator as a means of silencing progressive voices online. It’s a bullshit term for which we already had a perfectly good word: hypocrisy
- Karunamon 4y ago
  Hypocrisy is insufficiently precise. It is possible to disingenuously engage in any particular activity. If you wish to describe a specific behavior, then a better descriptor is necessary. On top of that, not all virtue signaling is necessarily disingenuous. And all terms are made up, and the political leanings of the person who supposedly coined the phrase is irrelevant to its applicability.
  - dools 4y ago
    You’re using the term disingenuous incorrectly so excuse me while I disregard your opinion on language entirely.

phpisthebest 4y ago

I am not aware of a context where virtue signaling would be a good practice or behavior.

throwaway0a5e 4y ago
I meant it's a useful and descriptive term. I abhor the behavior.
Zachsa999 4y ago
I like too think a virtuous person signals virtue without being narcissistic
erybodyknows 4y ago
Virtue can be practiced and even observed without being signalled.
- tsol 4y ago
  Practicing virtue in public, even if you don't intend it that way, is signaling virtue. What is strange is how in our society virtue has to be justified. Is it virtue signaling that people dislike, or being fake?
afavour 4y ago
Perhaps we're working to different definitions of the term. To me, virtue signaling is signaling (i.e. making publicly known) a virtuous act. To me that seems like an unambiguously good thing: it is likely to inspire others to similar virtuous acts, creating a feedback loop of people encouraging others to engage in good behaviour. "I voted! You should get out and vote too" feels like an example of positive virtual signaling. Broadly speaking, I think there is nothing wrong with, say, videoing yourself serving food at a soup kitchen. It's when you use that video to boost your own profile rather than the virtuous act that it becomes problematic. There are plenty of people that do that. However there are also plenty of people who interpret any public record of virtue as being inherently narcissistic and I think that's just as bad.
- vinyl7 4y ago
  The problem with public displays of virtue is that it comes off as seeking return value for the action. Virtuous acts should be done in quiet/secret and for the simple reason for it being virtuous. Seeking some other sort of value out of it (like social recognition, social credit, youtube views which end up with ad revenue) makes the act look dishonest. The act wasn't done because they were a nice person, the act was done because they were seeking to increase their own value. The way to go about this is to do the thing without anyone knowing and without displaying it. To do it without expecting any personal gain at all. If a friend tells their friend "afavour brought me soup when I was sick, it was so sweet of them" or if someone asks you what you do in your spare time and you say "sometimes I serve at a soup kitchen." then that's fine because that kind of display, which was prompted by other people, can't really be seen as you seeking to cash out the value of the virtuous act.
  - afavour 4y ago
    > it comes off as seeking return value for the action Surely that’s in the eye of the beholder? It is possible to interpret it that way, certainly. But applying the observers value judgement (i.e. how it comes off) onto the original actor seems unfair to me. Sometimes I feel like (and I don’t mean anything personal by this) we’re all cynical bastards these days so when we see someone do something genuinely altruistic we simply cannot process it as such and immediately seek a way to dismiss it as self-serving.
    - vinyl7 4y ago
      > But the people in the soup kitchen see me serving the food. Anyone walking by might see me in the window. The nuance here is that there's a difference being observed doing a kind act versus purposefully making it a public spectacle. I don't view people I observe doing something altruistic as self-seeking unless they try to "cash in" on it. I would see someone helping a person in need and think "how kind of them!" But then later, if I see an Instagram post from that person saying "There was this person in need of help and I went over there and did something about it", then it can be seen as self-seeking.
goodpoint 4y ago
Most people now use "virtue signaling" as as insult to quickly dismiss any person expressing ethical concerns.
- goodpoint 4y ago
  The silent downvotes only prove my point.
watwut 4y ago
Virtue signaling has similar effect as vice signaling: it signals to others what you think is good thing to do. It is statement toward rest of word.
- throwaway0a5e 4y ago
  The signal it sends is that appearances and whatnot matter more than actual substances, that appearing to do something is more important than doing something. Bragging about how your food is cruelty free when you don't really care about the food, you care about being able to say that it's cruelty free doesn't make you against animal cruelty except by some absurdly expansive definition of "against". And there's also 800lb gorilla that is political discourse where people routinely say one thing and then not only do nothing to advance that, they live their lives by something that's close to the opposite. Rewarding virtue signaling absolves people of much of the requirement to put their money where their mouth is and relaxing that requirement is a bad thing.
  - watwut 4y ago
    First paragraph care more about what whoever does that action feels then about what impact it has. All in all, it rewards primary doing and saying nothing. Everyone else can be accused of virtue signaling.

dools 4y ago

Virtue signalling is a term made up by a hard right libertarian propagandist writing for the spectator as a means of silencing progressive voices online. It’s a bullshit term for which we already had a perfectly good word: hypocrisy

Karunamon 4y ago
Hypocrisy is insufficiently precise. It is possible to disingenuously engage in any particular activity. If you wish to describe a specific behavior, then a better descriptor is necessary. On top of that, not all virtue signaling is necessarily disingenuous. And all terms are made up, and the political leanings of the person who supposedly coined the phrase is irrelevant to its applicability.
- dools 4y ago
  You’re using the term disingenuous incorrectly so excuse me while I disregard your opinion on language entirely.