I actually don’t mind virtue signaling by conservatives, libertarians, or classical liberals. I don’t really expect better from then, since they are defined by their holy cow virtues and institutions, and the behavior is kinda natural for them. Harmonizes with their institutions.
-
Show this thread
-
Progressive virtue signaling though, grates in an unpleasant way. I’m not sure why. Perhaps because I expect more from them. Ironically a virtue signal is an aliveness anti-signal to me. If you’re virtue signaling you’re not thinking and I generally expect prohressives to think.
2 replies 0 retweets 28 likesShow this thread -
This may sound weird, but I don’t expect actual thinking from the rest because their value lies is faithfully reproducing old arguments, that were once progressive in their own time. I expect high-quality reproduction. Classic greatest hits from Aristotle to Hayek.
3 replies 0 retweets 19 likesShow this thread -
Virtue signaling is expected from believers in old ideas that have been distilled. But “progressive” definitionally implies new ideas and fresh thinking. Stuff that hasn’t yet been compiled into “virtues” that can be signaled
2 replies 0 retweets 14 likesShow this thread -
Most ideologies are almost by construction acting-dead ideologies (cf
@bruces). Progressive politics has historically been associated with subversive thought, good art that disturbs and challenges, etc. To virtue signal is to admit failure at the progressive acting-alive project.3 replies 0 retweets 20 likesShow this thread -
To resort to virtue signaling represents a deeper failure of progressivism than failure at politics. It represents failure at art. Failure to consistently surprise yourself and others. Failure to put the familiar into unfamiliar perspectives. Failure to in fact *progress*.
4 replies 0 retweets 35 likesShow this thread -
Continuing from last night. Typical progressive values — justice, compassion, sustainability — seem to be far more deeply rooted in tradeoffs and compromise relative to non-progressive ones. There is no such thing as a “purist” way to be just, compassionate, or sustainable.
1 reply 0 retweets 15 likesShow this thread -
This might be why using them as fodder for virtue signaling is grating and smacks of authoritarianism. Justice is a tradeoff between confidence in evidence vs timeliness of redressal of harms experienced Compassion is a tradeoff between your pain and mine, present and future
2 replies 0 retweets 11 likesShow this thread -
Sustainability is a tradeoff between living with the knowledge we have versus waiting to know it more deeply and completely. You cannot actually practice any progressive value in a formulaic way. Every instance of applying it requires non-trivial thought.
3 replies 0 retweets 15 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @vgr
You seem to be saying "purist" and "nontrivial thought" are opposites. But they're not. "Purist" means holding the line -- a stalwart refusal to do certain things, ever. Generative thought *can* exist within boundaries.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Not engaging with morons, for instance, is a boundary that can make you more creative.
-
-
Replying to @s_r_constantin
Sure if the boundaries are themselves grounded in pragmatic awareness of their limits. How good is your moron classifier if you believe that one How well do you understand axiom of choice, godel type foundational subtleties if you draw a hard boundary around “logical”
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.