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

Selective Empathy Can Chip Away at Civil Society

kqed.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 80 posts

Re: Selective Empathy Can Chip Away at Civil Society

#31

Post by b0rsuk »

nostrademons wrote: post #13
speedplane wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Tribal instincts are super strong, that's been proven over and over again Tribal instincts aren't as strong as you think. Every civil and egalitarian right that people have gained since the enlightenment are the result of overcoming tribal instincts. The definition of a "tribe" is more often than not mostly a social construct. If society can set it up, it can tear it down.

The definition of tribes is a social construct. The existence of tribes is not. Reformers who seek to abolish tribalism usually find that they've simply redrawn the boundary lines and replaced one set of tribes with another. The dogmatism of the Church gets replaced by the patriotism of the State. Racism gets replaced by classism. Discrimination on appearance gets replaced by discrimination on education. Sometimes ju…

This is what I have problem with too. I dislike most forms of dogma, and dogmatic liberalism, freedom of faith, speech and so on can be toxic too. I mean too often it seems like it just makes taboos shift. The smile-or-die mentality, the rainbow crew of Star Trek, the outrage that Witcher rooted in ancient slavic history and myth doesn't contain black characters...

I think one of the healthiest approaches was shown by the Monty Python group. They made fun of religious people as well as of atheists.

I would like to live in a society where it's okay to make a joke about race, religion, sexual preferences and gender once in a while. Many things are fine in moderation. It's bad when someone keeps hammering one group over and over. People always told jokes about forbidden subjects. When you can't tell jokes about X at all, I think it signals a problem related to X.

I have yet to explore lectures of Jordan Petersen, but I found one of his remarks interesting. One of his studies shows many similarities between right wingers and social justice warriors.

One way to define conservatives is people who want to force most of their rules on others. One definition of liberals is people who want to enable all people to live however they want as long as it doesn't harm others. Going by these definitions, social justice warriors can be considered conservative. They've just moved to another camp.

I'm trying to say perhaps liberalism/conservatism is not the value of the variable, but the algorithm. What you do with your values. You can try to force your rules on others, or try to inspire and lead by example, or... just don't care. Or something in between.

I'm being vague and general with most of my points because comprehensive error handling can obscure the message.

Re: Selective Empathy Can Chip Away at Civil Society

#32

Post by roenxi »

What about the hypothesis that focusing on empathy is the problem, rather than its application the cure?

Gloomy as it is to say, technological superiority has been very comfortable but doesn't offer any new way of tackling the fact that humans are basically the same as they have been for the last millennium; large groups of people who simply are not going to agree with each other.

What is important is maintaining the institutions that have been wildly successful in mediating conflict between diverse groups, and that all the different tribes of a society make an effort to accept that institutions are more fair and reasonable than the alternatives.

Empathy does not resolve genuine disagreements. If it solves a problem, the problem was one of perception rather than reality.

Re: Selective Empathy Can Chip Away at Civil Society

#33

Post by b0rsuk »

Mirioron wrote: post #22
nostrademons wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The definition of tribes is a social construct. The existence of tribes is not. Reformers who seek to abolish tribalism usually find that they've simply redrawn the boundary lines and replaced one set of tribes with another. The dogmatism of the Church gets replaced by the patriotism of the State. Racism gets replaced by classism. Discrimination on appearance gets replaced by discrimination on education. Sometimes ju…

> Reformers who seek to abolish tribalism usually find that they've simply redrawn the boundary lines and replaced one set of tribes with another. I completely agree with this. It seems as though that many(all?) people have some group that's the Other and it's acceptable to attack them in various ways. For example, it used to be socially acceptable to attack nerds, but it isn't anymore, however, people have simply pi…

Around here there are tons of image memes about vegans and anti-vaxers. On websites that are mostly associated with the more liberal side. Apparently not. I guess it's just a desire to unite by having a common enemy or at least a target for ridicule.

Re: Selective Empathy Can Chip Away at Civil Society

#34

Post by b0rsuk »

caprese wrote: post #16
b0rsuk wrote: post #4

Tribal instincts are super strong, that's been proven over and over again [citation needed]. I'm afraid long-term empathy for the sake of Other can't work. It only seems to work when people still remember major disasters and wars. It's inevitable these fade away, isn't it? (except for very, very long term, when evolution and/or genetic engineering might change this) In my country anti-Muslim sentiment is strong, made…

> as for Islam my main beef is it doesn't distinguish between the religion and the secular state A lot of muslims don't consider or care about the governance model I think your 'trick' is still masking a lack of very basic understanding about the vast population of people that aren't doing anything radical

And I think it's hard to blame me for this because where I live there are very few Muslims. Muslims, homosexuals etc are always something you read about, not people you can distinguish on a street. They're afraid to identify openly, so you can't go and talk with them.

Re: Selective Empathy Can Chip Away at Civil Society

#35

Post by 0815test »

roenxi wrote: post #32

What about the hypothesis that focusing on empathy is the problem, rather than its application the cure? Gloomy as it is to say, technological superiority has been very comfortable but doesn't offer any new way of tackling the fact that humans are basically the same as they have been for the last millennium; large groups of people who simply are not going to agree with each other. What is important is maintaining the…

> What is important is maintaining the institutions that have been wildly successful in mediating conflict between diverse groups

This is indeed very important, but "empathy", while not such an institution, is a baseline cultural requirement to make these institutions feasible and sustainable in the longer run. There's not much ambiguity here; intensely tribal, closed and corrupt societies do a lot worse at managing conflicts (e.g. consider the Middle East, and why violent conflicts flare up so often there), not just empathy.

Re: Selective Empathy Can Chip Away at Civil Society

#36

Post by SolaceQuantum »

b0rsuk wrote: post #31
nostrademons wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The definition of tribes is a social construct. The existence of tribes is not. Reformers who seek to abolish tribalism usually find that they've simply redrawn the boundary lines and replaced one set of tribes with another. The dogmatism of the Church gets replaced by the patriotism of the State. Racism gets replaced by classism. Discrimination on appearance gets replaced by discrimination on education. Sometimes ju…

This is what I have problem with too. I dislike most forms of dogma, and dogmatic liberalism, freedom of faith, speech and so on can be toxic too. I mean too often it seems like it just makes taboos shift. The smile-or-die mentality, the rainbow crew of Star Trek, the outrage that Witcher rooted in ancient slavic history and myth doesn't contain black characters... I think one of the healthiest approaches was shown b…

A few points also to consider:

1) I haven’t personally seen outright outrage about it. I’ve seen some light criticism that there appears to be no black traders which would exist in those times, and that the characters are uniformly white while Slavic skin color is actually a range between pale and olive. These criticisms make sense to me and were not presented with anger. Could you show me example of outrage?

2) Jordan Peterson has not generally done much science lately, if at all about this subject with significant backing. He’s become more of an advocate of a specific viewpoint within his field(similar to other representatives Neil degrasse Tyson) and should not be considered an authority without several additional citations of more academically well regarded researchers. I wonder if perhaps this claim was more acceptable due to its palatability and not due to its actual veracity.

3) I agree that making jokes should eh universal, but as the OP mentioned empathy can teach someone why making a racist joke isn’t okay. Unfortunately we don’t live in a society where people make jokes but don’t actually act on them. Making jokes about oppressed groups in society, depending on their harshness, actually occurs in tandem with people tearing the same groups with harshness. For example, jokes about missing black fathers or single black mothers in America tend to be more hurtful than funny because it describes a real phenomenon where black men are disproportionately jailed and utilizes it for enjoyment. It’s similar to joking about assaulting a friend when one knows that that friend was recently stalked and assaulted by a stranger- it’s viewed as a ‘dick move’ because it is a joke that lacks empathy and understanding of ones audience. I believe this is an alternative viewpoint to your concerns that may he of interest to you to cosnsider.

Re: Selective Empathy Can Chip Away at Civil Society

#37

Post by deogeo »

SolaceQuantum wrote: post #36
b0rsuk wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is what I have problem with too. I dislike most forms of dogma, and dogmatic liberalism, freedom of faith, speech and so on can be toxic too. I mean too often it seems like it just makes taboos shift. The smile-or-die mentality, the rainbow crew of Star Trek, the outrage that Witcher rooted in ancient slavic history and myth doesn't contain black characters... I think one of the healthiest approaches was shown b…

A few points also to consider: 1) I haven’t personally seen outright outrage about it. I’ve seen some light criticism that there appears to be no black traders which would exist in those times, and that the characters are uniformly white while Slavic skin color is actually a range between pale and olive. These criticisms make sense to me and were not presented with anger. Could you show me example of outrage? 2) Jord…

> I’ve seen some light criticism that there appears to be no black traders which would exist in those times, and that the characters are uniformly white while Slavic skin color is actually a range between pale and olive.

Having been born and raised in a slavic country, I don't think I've seen a black person for the first 15 years of my life, except on TV. In a city with far more people than anything included in the Witcher. And skin color was very very close to uniformly white. So it's always fun to be told by Americans that no, actually, slavic countries have always been vibrant and diverse.

Re: Selective Empathy Can Chip Away at Civil Society

#38

Post by nilskidoo »

roenxi wrote: post #32

What about the hypothesis that focusing on empathy is the problem, rather than its application the cure? Gloomy as it is to say, technological superiority has been very comfortable but doesn't offer any new way of tackling the fact that humans are basically the same as they have been for the last millennium; large groups of people who simply are not going to agree with each other. What is important is maintaining the…

And we should all pretend that the internet resolves conflicts at any level? I think the widescale lack of communicating without empathizing pheromones is quite obviously making a shitstorm of the whole wide world. But keep culting with your bad self.

Re: Selective Empathy Can Chip Away at Civil Society

#39

Post by axlprose »

roenxi wrote: post #32

What about the hypothesis that focusing on empathy is the problem, rather than its application the cure? Gloomy as it is to say, technological superiority has been very comfortable but doesn't offer any new way of tackling the fact that humans are basically the same as they have been for the last millennium; large groups of people who simply are not going to agree with each other. What is important is maintaining the…

>What about the hypothesis that focusing on empathy is the problem, rather than its application the cure?

This is the thesis of the aptly named book "Against Empathy" by Paul Bloom. I always highly recommend it to everybody whenever I get the chance, because the thought that this might even be a possibility seldom ever crosses many people's minds.

Re: Selective Empathy Can Chip Away at Civil Society

#40

Post by caprese »

b0rsuk wrote: post #34
caprese wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> as for Islam my main beef is it doesn't distinguish between the religion and the secular state A lot of muslims don't consider or care about the governance model I think your 'trick' is still masking a lack of very basic understanding about the vast population of people that aren't doing anything radical

And I think it's hard to blame me for this because where I live there are very few Muslims. Muslims, homosexuals etc are always something you read about, not people you can distinguish on a street. They're afraid to identify openly, so you can't go and talk with them.

Hm... so I gather that you consider yourself the tolerant person in your society. Assuming that you are willing to imagine living in a more collaborative society all you need to understand is that people are just people. They have the same wants and desires. Connection, purpose, security, a general understanding that self-preservation requires respecting other people's goal of self-preservation.

It is that simple.

Post reply on HN