interesting. you're saying you've seen (destructive?) radicals who were vocally critical of ideological possession? care to elaborate? i haven't seen this. most anyone i've ever seen speaking meta-ideologically seems clear-headed, sane, helpful
Conversation
Replying to
The people who are the most critical of ideological highjacking in others, IME, are themselves tightly wound in that web - and completely unaware.
1
1
Replying to
ah, i see what you mean and have observed this behavior --- interesting. one thing that's key for me is that ideologues are quick to straw-man others as being in an opposing ideological camp, but it always goes only one way and they don't speak in meta-ideological terms
3
Replying to
He also holds up far less sophisticated thinkers like that bottom-feeder Ben Shapiro on the basis of their alignment with "conservatism".
Many of his ideological opponents *are* complete lunatics, but most of them are certainly more sane than people like Shapiro.
1
1
Replying to
interesting, i haven't seen his defenses of Shapiro. Shapiro is actually the quintessential example i was thinking of when composing my original tweet: a brilliant mind completely subservient to a set of ideas about how the world should be
1
1
i actually think Shapiro is incredibly, sharply intelligent but basically just spends all his time devising the punchiest knockout arguments for a set of pretty standard conservative positions he would never abandon
2
a thing i wonder about is whether we're kidding ourselves in thinking it's even possible to engage in unmotivated 'pure' reasoning. The Righteous Mind by Haidt made me feel that our values largely determine our ideological persuasion & our values may be largely beyond our control
1
1
still, a strong indicator that there's a spectrum ranging from Mind-Fucked to Truly Independent Thinker is that some people clearly update/refine their viewpoints regularly, openly question their own views, admit when they were wrong, etc --- clear signs they're after the truth
2
Replying to
It's a concept so completely without correlates in the real world, it's utter childishness to believe in it sans some very excellent justification.
1
1
Replying to
but would you agree that there is a spectrum and that some people are much closer to this ideal than others, while other people are much closer to the opposite?
2
Replying to
We can wrangle it as many ways as we want, but go enough layers down and all of our motivations flow from animal instinct - and everything else flows from that.
Rational?
In a sense, but not in the same sense as people obsessed with "rational thinking" frame rationality.
Replying to
sounds vaguely Freudian (i like Freud)
i'll have to think more on this. i feel like we can override base impulses with higher reasoning in many cases and i think long-term training in scientific/rational methods can genuinely make one more of a 'cool observer' with less bias
3
1
so while i agree that we can never become fundamentally rational, i do think we can actively enhance our rational faculties and use them in effective and important ways ... in which case, does it matter that we are not fundamentally rational in this sense? almost seems the point