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

A Sick Giant

waitbutwhy.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 138 posts

Re: A Sick Giant

#21

Post by crooked-v »

tyri_kai_psomi wrote: post #19
tehjoker wrote: post #15

The liberal worldview thinks that everything is basically ok and that the problem is that "norms" are being violated and bad information leads to pointless conflict. Liberals are wrong. There are fundemental structural problems with this country and the current psychosis is the result of neither political party addressing them while going war and profit crazy on the backs of the working people that slave and die with…

The comment is not fitting to the article, but I wanted to respond to it anyways because I found it interesting and it's not something talked about here much, for obvious reasons. The problem is going to escape many on the left, including most people here as well, as many people here are mostly agnostic/atheistic/anti-faith and believe having faith is somehow anti-intellectual. The reality of the situation is the US…

> suicide

Actually, suicide rates in the US are concentrated overwhelmingly in rural areas [1], which corresponds strongly to conservativism, while some of the lowest suicide rates in the country are in ultra-progressive bastions like New York City and San Francisco.

[1]: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2018/05/24/mappi...

Re: A Sick Giant

#22

Post by neogodless »

These are very long articles, and this is long chapter number ten out of twelve. So it's hard to TL;DR with any respect to a series of articles that's trying to TL;DR sociology, politics and polarization over the last half century.

The gist is that we have internal struggles between survival through power compared to thriving through critical thinking. This struggle is affected by the people around us; amplified because being part of a group pulls us in some ways towards survival instincts, and if we're lucky also pulls us towards critical thinking. As groups, we kind of have the same collective struggles as well.

The latest article uses ideas and terminology from the previous nine articles that I've attempted to summarize in a tiny paragraph above. It goes into some depth explaining how our country has slid, politically, from critical thinking and having opinions slightly one way or the other off from center (a center that has shifted over time) to having opinions grouped much further apart. Aka polarization.

And I'm not even done reading it. I enjoy it, and I'm optimistic models like this can help us, but I know that some people believe the models cut too many things out. I think that's problematic, because it is a very complex issue with a multitude of variables, and I think simplified models (and terminology) are necessary to explore the ultimate problem and potential solutions.

Re: A Sick Giant

#23

Post by snarf21 »

jpm_sd wrote: post #5

TL;DR: political polarization in the USA has measurably increased, and this is bad for the country and its citizens. However, some data suggest that that two-thirds of Americans fall into what they call the "Exhausted Majority", people who are fed up with both major parties, and politics in general.

Especially since we live in an oligarchy but everyone still thinks in terms of red vs blue or us vs them. It is quite the trick to misdirect blame to people who are just like you.

Re: A Sick Giant

#24

Post by neogodless »

bambataa wrote: post #12

I have enjoyed WaitButWhy articles in the past but with this new series the author seems to have spent a huge amount of time, energy and words coming up with ideas that aren't that new. I keep skimming through them waiting to find the big point.

I think any one of the ideas in the ten chapters so far are probably largely "accepted" (or sometimes controversial, such as simplifying a person's thought process to Primitive vs Higher-minded.) But I think trying to put the pieces together is harder.

People are quick to say "polarization happened because..." or "people hate the opposite political party because..." or "people only read news they agree with because..." and each of the pieces might be useful but I think seeing how those pieces are fitting together and compounding is also useful.

Re: A Sick Giant

#25

Post by 0x8BADF00D »

This article was highly disappointing to read. No mention of how Conservatism is effectively dead in the US (Donald “Bibi” Trump is basically a Democrat). No discussion of Federal Reserve and how it’s contributing to inflation. The author also seems to be a textbook narcissist given his overreaction to being told to shut his phone off on a plane. The only thing “Giant” about this article is this dude’s ego.

Re: A Sick Giant

#26

Post by omegaworks »

tyri_kai_psomi wrote: post #19
tehjoker wrote: post #15

The liberal worldview thinks that everything is basically ok and that the problem is that "norms" are being violated and bad information leads to pointless conflict. Liberals are wrong. There are fundemental structural problems with this country and the current psychosis is the result of neither political party addressing them while going war and profit crazy on the backs of the working people that slave and die with…

The comment is not fitting to the article, but I wanted to respond to it anyways because I found it interesting and it's not something talked about here much, for obvious reasons. The problem is going to escape many on the left, including most people here as well, as many people here are mostly agnostic/atheistic/anti-faith and believe having faith is somehow anti-intellectual. The reality of the situation is the US…

>the US was founded, both socially and politically on Judeo-Christian principles of morality

What principles of morality excuse and justify native genocide and chattel slavery: practices that formed the actual economic and political foundation of the United States? "Judeo-Christian" is a white-evangelical term that erases Jewish culture and folds it into a narrative of supremacy.

>There are positions now being held by major political frontrunners that are simply not compatible with any person of faith

Your presumption is false. Not all people follow your faith or the narrow view you have of the faithful. Of all the founding narratives, the one grounded most in the historical political reality was the need for American to encompass the varied faiths of the early country. Among the colonists were Quakers, Catholics, Lutherans, Jews, Baptists, Anglicans and many others. They attempted to write a constitution that would ensure they couldn't create a State that would allow one to impose their beliefs on another.

It follows that this same constitution would not allow the State to impose the beliefs of a minority[1] on choices a woman makes with her own body.

1. https://www.people-press.org/2019/08/29/u-s-public-continues...

Re: A Sick Giant

#27

Post by [deleted] »

funnybeam wrote: post #11
Nition wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I knew someone would disagree, but it just sounds really antisocial to me. Sure, the woman should have asked him to put his phone in airplane mode instead of going straight to the attendant, but he could have also replied with an "oh, sorry" and put his phone on airplane mode when told off about the rule he was in fact breaking.

And the author in fact says in the article that that is what he should have done. The whole thing is about how everyone can be anti social from time to time

[deleted]

Re: A Sick Giant

#28

Post by AnimalMuppet »

Nition wrote: post #8
qub1t wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Literally the next paragraph he writes: “But that’s not what happened, because her aggressive tattletale move immediately threw my Primitive Mind into a rage, plummeting me down the Psych Spectrum. This banished my Higher Mind to the closet of my subconscious, allowing my Primitive Mind to come up with a genius-yet-psychotic plan for revenge. Which worked, and made my Primitive Mind feel deeply satisfied in a very no…

I'd like to think most people would act more civilized initially in that situation. In fact the most civilized thing to do would have been to simply follow the rules in the first place, knowing that most passengers will believe they must be important.

I think that's his point. The jerk can be him. It can be you. It can be me. We are all of us able to be like this, able to be controlled by the "primitive mind", able to engage in power games.

And I differ a bit with your reasoning. Follow the rules because most passengers believe they must be important? Not because, say, the airline thinks they must be important?

Re: A Sick Giant

#29

Post by ForHackernews »

Nition wrote: post #2

> I recently engaged in a fun, joint Psych Spectrum roller coaster with a stranger on an airplane. We were on the runway, getting ready to take off, and I was doing my typical “I know the flight attendant said to turn all phones onto airplane mode but the whole policy is really quite inane so I’m just gonna keep texting until we take off and I lose service” thing, and a woman next to me decided I was an asshole and l…

[flagged]

Re: A Sick Giant

#30

Post by AlphaWeaver »

I've been reading Tim Urban's writing for a while. One of the most valuable things in his writing isn't originality, but delivery.

He might not be coming up with original ideas (he regularly references the research he consulted to form his writing) but he _does_ do a great job of breaking down complex ideas into a form that's easily digestible.

The first several chapters of this series (worth a read, even if it's the only thing you read this year) are devoted entirely to building the vocabulary needed to discuss these concepts. He works hard to help build a mental model for the reader, which makes his writing significantly more accessible to the average human.

Post reply on HN