1/ If you're inferential within a particular subculture and want to use that influence to help correct (what you believe to be) their mistaken biases, it's generally useful to advocate for beliefs that aren't already fully-embraced by your disciples.
-
Show this thread
-
2/ I know this sounds fucking obvious. And it is! But I don't think it remains that way as influence grows. The feedback signals provided become far removed from an unbiased sample. It's easy to think you're saying important and novel things when your cheerleaders cheer you on.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 likeShow this thread -
3/ But realistically, I think those are the only people you can truly influence. You can aim for converting people in your out-group, but few people seem to try doing so in any serious or durable way — it's exhausting and costly and affords you no tangible benefits.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 likeShow this thread -
4/ But all of this requires self-awareness and perspective that is desperately hard to maintain for the reasons already mentioned. I guess what I'm saying is that — while I'm not "influential" in any real way — I really would like to be able to take some clear-eyed belief census.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likesShow this thread
5/ That is, of the people who do follow *and* engage with me, which beliefs are genuinely contentious? Because outside of just shitposting or loudly condemning fuckery, that stuff gives good reflective leverage.
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.