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.
-
-
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 -
Replying to @Moshe_Hoffman
Political alignments trumps reason for most people. You cannot argue against their political positions withput antagonizing them, even and especially if you are correct.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
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 -
Replying to @Moshe_Hoffman
The willingness to entertain even absurd convictions represents a public sacrifice of reasoned autonomy on the altar of being a reliably good tribe member. You recognize your tribe not by generic rationality but by their specific epistemological scars.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Plinz
Hmm, so you are saying willingness to look illogical is a costly display of commitment to the group?
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes
Yes, and I think it largely works. If you find that a random person has exactly the same wall preferences as yourself based on political alignment, they are more likely to support you in other matters as well. They might also be more trustworthy house guests etc.
-
-
Replying to @Plinz
(Aside: Hmm, why more trustworthy house guest?) Hmm, but why would our political alignments being the same lead us to commit *this* logical fallacy. That’s what I am puzzled by (still).
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.