Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Overcoming Us vs. Them

nautil.us

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 249 posts

Re: Overcoming Us vs. Them

#211

Post by tomjen3 »

frgtpsswrdlame wrote: post #2

I think this is going to be the next big challenge in social tech: Contact: The consequences of growing up amid diversity just discussed bring us to the effects of prolonged contact on Us/Theming. In the 1950s the psychologist Gordon Allport proposed “contact theory.” Inaccurate version: bring Us-es and Thems together (say, teenagers from two hostile nations in a summer camp), animosities disappear, similarities star…

Why would I want to integrate them? They have some insanely hurtful views, which they stick to no matter the evidence, and society doesn't need them, they need fewer of them and more of us.

Re: Overcoming Us vs. Them

#213

Post by yesenadam »

I got to the end and realized I'd been reading Robert Sapolsky.

His "Biology of Human Behavior" Stanford lecture course in about 25 parts is on youtube. It's absolutely amazing; he's a great lecturer, articulate, funny, fascinating, a great storyteller about remarkable experiments and legendary scientists. It starts with evolutionary biology/sociobiology and goes down via a dozen levels of explanation ('buckets' he calls them) to brains and genes and how they work, in quite a lot of detail. I couldn't recommend it any more highly. p.s. My girlfriend (very non-sciency) loved it too.

Re: Overcoming Us vs. Them

#215

Post by j7ake »

yesenadam wrote: post #213

I got to the end and realized I'd been reading Robert Sapolsky. His "Biology of Human Behavior" Stanford lecture course in about 25 parts is on youtube. It's absolutely amazing; he's a great lecturer, articulate, funny, fascinating, a great storyteller about remarkable experiments and legendary scientists. It starts with evolutionary biology/sociobiology and goes down via a dozen levels of explanation ('buckets' he c…

Nautilus has great articles I wish there was a way to make a compilation of the best ones then binge read

Re: Overcoming Us vs. Them

#216

Post by lucideer »

contravariant wrote: post #185
pklausler wrote: post #133

This would be easier if We and Them simply differed in arbitrary preferences. But I fear that when We and Them disagree on basic epistemology, we simply sound crazy to each other. And this irreconcilable difference, if it exists, will eventually always come out if you talk long enough.

The problem with Us vs. Them thinking isn't that there is a group of people that you fundamentally disagree with, but rather that you've constructed a somewhat nebulous "them" which you've ascribed all negative qualities about "them". The way to recognise this is to ask yourself if you can actually name any particular example of the "them" you're arguing against. Because if not, you risk arguing against a straw man y…

> The way to recognise this is to ask yourself if you can actually name any particular example of the "them" you're arguing against.

Unfortunately, I think what can often compound this line of thinking is a willingness to speculatively ascribe qualities to people we've just met in an attempt to put them into a box we can relate to (either positively relate or negatively relate).

Asking someone to think of a particular example of "them" might simply lead to an example of someone they've judged on first impressions.

Re: Overcoming Us vs. Them

#217

Post by programmarchy »

gt_ wrote: post #208
programmarchy wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People with sub-100 IQs are probably not going to be able to achieve the level of critical thinking you're talking about. There's a genetic component to that level of intelligence, and it's not an easy problem that can be solved by teaching people a few tips and tricks. On top of that, the public education system is not designed to produce critical thinking people, but rather people who can memorize and follow orders…

All good points, hard to argue with. What would you suggest be done?

Remove control of education from the federal level and return the money and decision-making power to the local levels. Stop all the one-size-fits-all programs that don’t work and make schools highly competitive and merit-based.

If the federal level is involved it should be to grant scholarships to high performing students, and invest more in trade schools for students that may not achieve high academic marks but have other talents that could be developed.

End welfare programs that subsidize r-selected birth rates, and give tax cuts and incentives to R-selected birth rates, with the goal of boosting the national average IQ. Finally, invest heavily in genetic testing and editing research which would allow parents to select or modify embryos to have genes that correlate with higher intelligence, like China has promised to do.

Basically, go all in on intelligence and address the issue at the biological rather than the cultural level.

Re: Overcoming Us vs. Them

#218

Post by bornonline1 »

tfha wrote: post #64

Feel this is very appropriate after the net neutrality thread. Top comment was a very blatent red-vs-blue characterisation, which of course is not the right mentality. If we want to build a better world, we need to work together instead of target eachother.

The decision was made out of greed. And for a person who is not greedy it is a clear us v them. I don't understand how can we put pro-greed and anti-greed into the same 'us' basket.

Re: Overcoming Us vs. Them

#219

Post by barrkel »

RonanTheGrey wrote: post #193
quantumofmalice wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a reductio ad absurdum. There are reasonable levels of division well above tribal levels. Singapore is basically a city state, and I don't notice a collapse of civilization there. Territories with strong social identity would maintain political union, territories with weak social identity and severe political disagreements would split. As much as is possible, no one is ruled by people they hate. https://en.wik…

I don't understand the downvoting of this comment. What is being described is effectively tribalism. Tribalism worked well for humans for roughly 350,000 years. Then we idiots come along and think that we've got a better way that is already showing its weaknesses and strain after just a couple of thousand years. Really? Maybe, just maybe our ancestors were on to something and there's something we can learn from them.…

Tribalism is red in tooth and claw, it's the culture of might makes right. Technology stops tribalism being a viable or desirable culture today. Tribalism scaled up as technology necessarily permits and forces it be scaled up is fascism.

Re: Overcoming Us vs. Them

#220

Post by bornonline1 »

maxpupmax wrote: post #41

On a meta-level, I wonder if this writer was paid for their work to create the article? If you haven't seen it yet, Nautil.us has a very spotty record of paying their workers over the last year at least. https://nwu.org/an-open-letter-from-freelancers-at-nautilus-...

Does the pay dynamic change if the article was a promotion for a book?
Post reply on HN