The argument that walls *generally* don’t work (which is prima facie absurd) provides an interesting illustration of how motivated reasoning works in political arguments.https://twitter.com/PereGrimmer/status/1076616122844229632 …
-
Show this thread
-
(We really don’t want Trumps wall. So *any* arguments that would undermine his wall are readily believed and propogated. Even the arguments that we would otherwise know are silly. Even when there are very legitimate arguments at hand.)
2 replies 0 retweets 10 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @Moshe_Hoffman
If someone from “respectable society” actually wants and supports Trump‘s wall, they probably won’t tell us, because the potential downside is larger than the upside, and we likely don’t know at least some their better arguments.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
-
Replying to @Moshe_Hoffman @Plinz
I concur, we probably don’t hear the more reasonable arguments (on both sides imo). And to me that’s an interesting phenomena. Is it more effective at promoting one’s policies? If so, why? Or just a better virtue signal? Unsure myself tbh.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @Moshe_Hoffman
Like with Brexit, a random person off the street (including myself) is unable to realistically predict the consequences and have little agency over their policy related beliefs. I sure hope the people whose models our public administration acts on have run good simulations.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @Plinz
Fair. But wouldn’t you readily know “walls never work” is a bad argument?
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Moshe_Hoffman
Yes, but we are nerds. Our allergic reaction to statements that are obviously false is automatic. Normies may feel that such a statement is sometimes “right”, which is like “true” but also “good”...
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Plinz
Fair. Good point. But is that just because of motivated reasoning? And hence the phenomena/puzzle I started with? Or you think they are actually using logic/language, even outside of the political discourse, differently?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
Political alignments trumps reason for most people. You cannot argue against their political positions withput antagonizing them, even and especially if you are correct.
-
-
Replying to @Plinz
100% agree. (Well 99%. I think there are *some* ways to persuade. But that’s a different discussion.) But still, if this is driven by political alignments, still have to clarify how “political alignments” works, and why it leads to *this* logical bias? Eg could be ...
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Moshe_Hoffman @Plinz
Signals political allegiance. Or Is effective for political party, which somehow you are motivated to help with (perhaps because of peer pressure from other party members or leaders?) Or ? What do you think?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like - 4 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.