1/ If outrage was for efficient enforcement of norms (a la @slatestarcodex), topics & positions would not vary so much based on political affiliation. Outrage would be focused on old, largely-eradicated behaviors commonly agreed to be bad. Instead...https://slatestarcodex.com/2018/06/19/contra-caplan-on-arbitrary-deploring/ …
-
Show this thread
-
2/ Outrage generally focuses on highly-disputed topics of great political symbolism, and comes from only one party or with opposite outrages for each side. That suggests it's signaling (a la
@robinhanson &@KevinSimler).2 replies 2 retweets 23 likesShow this thread -
3/ Signaling both fits and adds nuance to
@bryan_caplan's original "vividness + herding" criticism of outrage. Vivid = highly symbolic, an effective signal of values. Herding = how groups use signals to show shared values. https://www.econlib.org/archives/2017/12/the_unbearable.html …1 reply 1 retweet 7 likesShow this thread
4/ While @bryan_caplan makes good counterpoints on the specific cases of chemical weapons and sexual harassment (https://www.econlib.org/the-illusory-arbitrariness-of-deploring/ …), I think this more general, case-independent critique of the proposed "rational outrage" is much stronger.
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.