This, but absolutely unironically, since the ironic version is naked advocacy for an ethno-state.
-
-
At that point in-group is sufficiently flexible that you'd need to expend considerable active effort not to have one.
-
right. what happens instead is that really isolated and alienated people (e.g. incels) expend minimum effort and get an in-group that is really shitty and bad for them. they'll take a shitty, harmful in-group over no in-group because the pain of total isolation is that severe.
-
and it's a horrible trap that leads to tragic outcomes and years of suffering for most of them.
-
Alternate hypothesis: they have idiosyncratic partner preferences (both sexual and otherwise) and exotic beliefs, so it's less "alienation" and more "active self-selection into a very wonky weird community", like a flagellant monk order
-
and it could have been way way worse. It could have been a literal flagellant monk order. Or a literal death cult. Or a funny innovative combination of those.
-
interesting thoughts. granted it could be worse, but it's already bad, how do we make it better?
-
I am not sure it is possible to make it better. I mean, it's both "ethically dubious" and empirically hard to "fix" someone's sexual and interpersonal interactions preferences. By same token you could try to "fix" high-victimity people (very un-PC idea!) or "religious nuts"
-
definitely agree with you on the pointlessness of individual radical interventions. "conversion therapy" of all varieties is gross. what I mean by fix is more like "how do we create the social environmental conditions that ameliorate this issue gracefully over time?"
- 3 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
We don't know the long run consequences of this new way of structuring social networks. My bet is that it increases risk of large scale catastrophes. Deterritorialization drives both innovation and risk of ruin. You can't have one without the other. Need to balance.
-
I think I'm more optimistic than you are on this point. So many of our existing systems are dysfunctional, corrupt, and sclerotic that my risk tolerance for the sake of innovation is pretty high right now.
-
Oh, we need to innovate for sure. My point is that existing systems my seem old to us as individuals, but they are actually new in terms of human history. Western civilization has been on a trajectory of atomization for 1000 years. All that is bound to collapse eventually.
-
People tend to think that modern Western civilization is all that ever was, and rarely zoom out to see the grand cycles in history or imagine how someone 1000 years ago perceived reality. It's a Western cultural tendency to favor spatial empathy and devalue
#TemporalEmpathy. -
Faustian civilization is fueled by a form of sky daddy worship that sublimated into a worship of reason, measurement, and progress, which emphasizes technology. Most civilizations throughout history didn't have this cosmology. All our thoughts are biased by this.
-
'biased towards shit that works' is a pretty acceptable bias, tbh
-
Are you saying that all the past Great civilizations, Greeks, Egyptian, Hindu, Mayan, Chinese, etc didn't work? They had profoundly different worldviews and survived longer than the modern West.
-
They're mostly dead, tho.
- 10 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.