31–40 of 321 posts
Hollywood producers and shadowy finance guys used to “keep their identity small.” We have learned quite a bit about them in recent years (and there’s obviously so much more we don’t know). As we live in a time when there is a crisis of trust across institutions — politics, religion, corporate, whatever — you’re much better off being transparent.
The thing that’s missing, of course, is that people aren’t “iterating on their beliefs” and people aren’t also accepting of the fact that people who had beliefs that were wrong or problematic in the past are able to iterate and change. This is a future area of improvement for human social development.
All of this “every human in the world is connected” stuff is very new. There aren’t really any absolute truths or rules yet. It’s going to take a lot longer than 30 years to sort out.
Edit: I would also say that there are binary opinions (ex: people shouldn’t harm kids) and what I call “spectrum” opinions (ex: the existence of America is a net positive to the world). We have to get better about engaging people on spectrum opinions and allowing differences to exist, without going to war as we would with a binary opinion that probably has only one right answer for any decent human. Again, things to be done in the future.
From a social perspective, identities make us just as we make them. One is born in identities outside of their control. And it is not possible to separate yourself from an identity as easily as the author argues. But people can agree on clear rules of engagement, evidence, and interpretation, for a _better_ interaction.
The problem is, our society condones false identities. A true fifth column of lost souls.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Second amendment is religious text.
For me, after spending two hours listening to an interview with a woman who escaped North Korea, it might as well be.
I think I listened to the same interview a few days ago. Most likely the Jordan Peterson interview with Yeonmi Park. Very interesting and well worth the time imo: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8yqa-SdJtT4
> people feel they have to be over some threshold of expertise to post comments about that “that” being things that are not political or religious. What vaccines and 5G have shown is that you do not need to be qualified to talk about a topic. A strong opinion about anything is what qualifies you to be an expert in 2021. Based on that article and my memory, this is a phenomenon that has happened in the last 10 years.…
Political culture of the last few years also has something to do with it. Almost everything can be associated with a political faction now, 5G, vaccines, celebrity squabbles, ocean acidification, early human migration theories... Political culture bleeds out.
This is dangerous advice that assists abusers and others from being called out regarding their behavior, because those who witness / are victimized / etc feel that they should “keep a low profile” and avoid getting involved. I know, because I used to believe this sort of thing and didn’t act when watching abusers operate in a variety of scenes, including Silicon Valley. Luckily, large groups of angry women have vocal…
I’m confounded by the advice to avoid conflict by restricting one’s identity. By all means, don’t conflate your preference with your identity. But this is an awful way to address people whose actual experienced identity is needlessly a source of conflict. I spent most of my life shielding myself from admitting I’m queer, and nearly all of it shielding myself from admitting I’m non-binary and admitting I’m autistic, u…
> “As a rule, any mention of religion on an online forum degenerates into a religious argument. Why? Why does this happen with religion and not with Javascript” I got some bad news for 2009 PG from the future…