Live data from Hacker News

The vital art of talking to strangers

economist.com

81–90 of 290 posts

Re: The vital art of talking to strangers

#81
post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We used to call this going to church. When literally everyone of all political stripes attended the same churches, going to a church potluck was basically being paired randomly. However large political factions have made church membership out to be undesirable. We are reaping the rewards. I realized yesterday reading about cornel west, that even though I disagree with his politics, I see from his Christianity we have…

This is a rosy view of religion, although I accept that is your experience and perspective, and thank you for sharing it. To me, church attendance is about making the in/out group very clear. You may feel close to different political views based on your single church or flavor of Christianity, but that's still a pretty limited group. I think church membership has become undesirable because 1) fewer people believe in…

> To me, church attendance is about making the in/out group very clear. You may feel close to different political views based on your single church or flavor of Christianity, but that's still a pretty limited group.

It's not really though. I mean, being Catholic (and honestly, I know so little about Protestantism that I don't really feel qualified to speak to it), there are a lot of politics in the church.

In 'the Big Sort', the author Bill Bishop talks about how Americans are dividing themselves up by geography, religion (or lack thereof), jobs, education, etc. It's like we're splitting in to two different worlds.

I've noticed it at church too. Frankly, the left-leaning Catholics have all left. We chock it up to things like abortion and sexual ethics but I don't buy it. Many right-leaning Catholics have severe disagreements with church preaching, especially on the topics of aid to foreigners, the responsibility of society with regards to health care, views on death penalty's usefulness, etc. The only difference to me, is that conservatives tend to value authority and order more, and thus remain catholic even when the church preaches things they don't like.

> 2) the stated positions of many major religions on issues of abortion and inclusion.

I guess, but man you should see my conservative friends after the priest gives a homily on immigration. If they left the church because of this, I'd accuse them of idolatry -- placing their views on immigration as more important than God. I accuse my leftist friends who leave because of abortion of the same. Independent of the religious and spiritual aspects, it seems to me to be abandoning your community, that has supported you for many years, simply because of one issue we disagree on. That's like leaving your wife because you can't agree on which style of house to buy -- at some point you need to compromise.

It's weird because my left-leaning friend's parents are often still Catholic and have the same view as my family does on remaining part of the church even if what they preach is hard. Whereas my younger friends all left.

The sad thing though is that I feel there is a lot of missed out opportunities for shared understanding. Despite classifying these parents as 'left-leaning' and myself being more 'right-leaning', I'd consider these people to be intelligent, thoughtful, and friends. Whereas with my own generation, if you label yourself a leftist, all of a sudden right-wingers are supposed to hate you, and vice versa. It just seems dehumanizing.

I'd rather chat about politics in a friendly manner with a shared set of concerns over a doughnut on Sunday morning, than in an angry social media screed. But it seems like my generation prefers the latter. And frankly, from my perspective, it feels like my left-leaning friends simply left while we stayed behind to talk.

Re: The vital art of talking to strangers

#82
I dislike these kind of books, since they are designed to overcomplicate things by appealing to the mids and upper-mids needs to follow authority, defer to expertise, and use checklists and systems to try and remove any unpleasantness from interactions. "This common thing is really important! Because of science! Here is a study! Here are the health benefits! Let's also tie this into reducing climate change! I have used my big brain to give you a blueprint of how things should go! It's all good, because someone on the book jacket is wearing a lab coat!"

I honestly await titles like "The Lost Art of Petting a Kitten," and "Outdoors; the Secret Benefits of Putting Your Laundry Outside to Dry."

I'd also suggest the authors to follow the nifty trend of profanity in the titles of these self-help books. "I Don't Give a Fuck: The Vital Art of Talking to Strangers" and "Badass: The Power of Strangers" might help sales among certain demographics.

Re: The vital art of talking to strangers

#83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Food for thought: Maybe there's something wrong with your family if you can't share a meal together in peace. Like families, societies need shared values. If a third of the population is religious extremist, another third believes in freedom and liberalism and the rest in Communism, fascism, or something even different, there is no common ground. I'm a tolerant person but I can't sit with people who preach that we sh…

A big part of why I think my hypothesis would work is that I believe we have these shared values in the US. The problem is that these shared values have been obscured by disagreement on how to attain them, and by focusing on group identities that mark us all as "Other" to someone else.

I like your idea. At worst, you'd find out sooner or later if these shared values are a myth. Getting to know others is never a mistake.

I met plenty of different strangers from around the world through Hospitality Club (the concept later copied by CouchSurfing) and never had a bad experience. Many of my friends and family thought it was dangerous inviting strangers into your home. And maybe today it is, I'm not sure. But back then practically everyone signed up there had the same open-minded spirit, they wanted to learn about people in other countries and further intercultural understanding and friendship. I've met lots of people from very different walks of life, people I might have never otherwise talked to. This is positive diversity, when there's a shared value and people can unite around it and trust each other.

To give a negative example many people in Western societies, in their strive to not be racist, have bought into the false belief that all cultures are equal, that you're assigned one by birth and that you're not allowed to criticize the culture of "other" people. Which ironically in itself is a racist idea. This in turn has lead to political movements that consider it taboo discussing certain problems connected with topics like religion, culture and ethnicity. And it's given birth to the kind of laissez-faire multiculturalism where problems never get addressed and crime, mistrust and conflict are rampant. Because people either get divided among identity lines like you mention, or unchecked immigration gives these societies the death blow (the Western European model).

Re: The vital art of talking to strangers

#84
post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We used to call this going to church. When literally everyone of all political stripes attended the same churches, going to a church potluck was basically being paired randomly. However large political factions have made church membership out to be undesirable. We are reaping the rewards. I realized yesterday reading about cornel west, that even though I disagree with his politics, I see from his Christianity we have…

> When literally everyone of all political stripes attended the same churches The mere act of belonging to any given religion pre-selected certain ideas about how the world works and should work. Hardly "all political stripes".

Okay but if everyone attended church, as it used to be in this country, then by definition, essentially all political stripes of any import would be represented in them, and people would have to confront people who disagree with them physically.

Re: The vital art of talking to strangers

#85
post #63
post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We used to call this going to church. When literally everyone of all political stripes attended the same churches, going to a church potluck was basically being paired randomly. However large political factions have made church membership out to be undesirable. We are reaping the rewards. I realized yesterday reading about cornel west, that even though I disagree with his politics, I see from his Christianity we have…

Yeah, I too long for the days past when the US had less cultural problems/conflicts due to high church attendance numbers.

There was a time in the US when good god fearin' church folk could gather together for traditional cultural expressions like extra-judicial lynchings of wrongly accused black men. You have to think America's lost something over the years. Thankfully.

Re: The vital art of talking to strangers

#86
post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We used to call this going to church. When literally everyone of all political stripes attended the same churches, going to a church potluck was basically being paired randomly. However large political factions have made church membership out to be undesirable. We are reaping the rewards. I realized yesterday reading about cornel west, that even though I disagree with his politics, I see from his Christianity we have…

> However large political factions have made church membership out to be undesirable. This comment appears to be a dog whistle, so please do correct me if I'm totally wrong here. But this reads like "Democrats / the left have demonized belonging to a church / Christianity," which is a common right wing talking point. Is that what you're saying here?

I don't mean just the democrats no. It seems to me to be a large faction of people, including certain elements of the 'alt-right'.

But yes, you're right in that I perceive the left as having demonized belonging to a church. This explains the growing disconnect between the democratic party and minorities, and why the GOP has started to make gains with them. The democratic party ignores religion at its own peril.

It's especially weird since the democratic party used to be really into religion.

This is hardly a 'right wing talking point'. My own parents left the democratic party because of this, well before they had ever tuned in to Fox, Limbaugh, or whatever. Labeling something as a 'right wing talking point' is just a democratic dog whistle to ignore real phenomena.

Re: The vital art of talking to strangers

#87
post #62

As a related anecdote, I used to perform experiments by dressing in particular ways while going out in public. If I wore a nice blazer-type jacket and generally looked more preppy, I would definitely notice different behavior as when I might dress with with a t shirt and long sleeve over it with long sleeve shirt unbuttoned. I attribute this partly to conditioning via TV show characters etc.

I spent a day trying to smile at strangers. The result was that half of them gave me a "do I know you?" look, and the other half looked at me like I was crazy and backed away. Not encouraging...

I remember a teacher who cycled to work every day, along a coastal route. Because he saw the same people so often, he set himself a goal to smile at all he recognised so they'd smile back.

Last time we spoke, he was still battling one obstinate hold-out (while reminds me of an old joke - 'smiles' is actually the longest word in the english langugage because there's a mile between the s's).

Re: The vital art of talking to strangers

#88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That sounds like fun. Although I hope you are ready to meet lots of Christians and a few alcoholics every year. Just remember that the 90% doesn't like talking about their jobs. Hope you know the latest sportsball news... That being said, there's usually other commonalities to discuss.

I've met lots and lots of Christians and a decent number of alcoholics. Most are very nice folks, just like all the non-Christians and non-alcoholics.

I think the alcoholics depend on what time of the night you catch them.

Re: The vital art of talking to strangers

#89
post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That sounds like fun. Although I hope you are ready to meet lots of Christians and a few alcoholics every year. Just remember that the 90% doesn't like talking about their jobs. Hope you know the latest sportsball news... That being said, there's usually other commonalities to discuss.

> Although I hope you are ready to meet lots of Christians and a few alcoholics every year. Always good to lump the Christians in with the alcoholics.

No offense to the christians. I was just trying to think of groups that compose more than 10% of the population.

Re: The vital art of talking to strangers

#90
post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It could be argued that HN, news, and Reddit are less hedonist because they provide education. Although, my long term plan is to eliminate those in favor of non fiction books and personal projects. The best "pro comic book" argument I've heard is that science fiction can help you consider potential futures of humanity. This can reduce being surprised by biotechnology and AI events. This could help humanity vote bette…

Are you sure you want to say that people who like comic books are hedonists? That’s an overly cut and dried argument and people aren’t nearly that simple. Isn’t it more charitable and accurate to suggest that people like what they like? I like running obscenely long distances. First, what business is it of yours how others spend their time? Second, what possibly qualifies you to claim people are hedonists because the…

Hedonist is the proper name for the philosophy. Maybe I read too much philosophy because I was merely saying the proper term in the dichotomy between virtue ethics and pleasure ethics.

Maybe I should stick to talking sportsball.

Post reply on HN