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

Adversarial Collaboration

edge.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 224 posts

Re: Adversarial Collaboration

#31

Post by scifibestfi »

bigmatto wrote: post #3

One of the most disappointing things that I have learned is that most people hold opinions in order to be part of some group. If someone is a member of a group, it is almost not worth listening to their arguments, especially arguments in support of views held strongly by that group. They are arguing in order to maintain their group membership, not to find the truth. It appears this is true of academic and scientific…

In fact that's how many get into the elite group and jockey for position within it.

"Think about what it takes to claw your way into America’s elite strata. Unless you were born into the upper-middle class, your surest route is to pursue an elite education. To do that, it pays to be exquisitely sensitive to the beliefs and prejudices of the people who hold the power to grant you access to the social and cultural capital you badly want. By setting the standards for what counts as praiseworthy, elite universities have a powerful effect on youthful go-getters."

"As the senior assistant director of admissions at Yale recently observed, “for those students who come to Yale, we expect them to be versed in issues of social justice. We encourage them to be vocal when they see an opportunity for change in our institution and in the world.” Picture yourself as an eager high schooler reading these words, and then jotting down notes. You absorb, assuming you hadn’t already, what it takes to make your way in contemporary elite America. And as you grow older, you lean into the rhetorical gambits that served you so well in the past. You might even build a worldview out of them."

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/08/the-utilit...

Re: Adversarial Collaboration

#32

Post by markdown »

scifibestfi wrote: post #31
bigmatto wrote: post #3

One of the most disappointing things that I have learned is that most people hold opinions in order to be part of some group. If someone is a member of a group, it is almost not worth listening to their arguments, especially arguments in support of views held strongly by that group. They are arguing in order to maintain their group membership, not to find the truth. It appears this is true of academic and scientific…

In fact that's how many get into the elite group and jockey for position within it. "Think about what it takes to claw your way into America’s elite strata. Unless you were born into the upper-middle class, your surest route is to pursue an elite education. To do that, it pays to be exquisitely sensitive to the beliefs and prejudices of the people who hold the power to grant you access to the social and cultural capi…

> for those students who come to Yale, we expect them to be versed in issues of social justice. We encourage them to be vocal when they see an opportunity for change in our institution and in the world.

Would you want anything less in an academic institution? That's the entire point of places of higher learning.

Re: Adversarial Collaboration

#33

Post by lapcat »

bigmatto wrote: post #3

One of the most disappointing things that I have learned is that most people hold opinions in order to be part of some group. If someone is a member of a group, it is almost not worth listening to their arguments, especially arguments in support of views held strongly by that group. They are arguing in order to maintain their group membership, not to find the truth. It appears this is true of academic and scientific…

> If someone is a member of a group, it is almost not worth listening to their arguments, especially arguments in support of views held strongly by that group.

Who isn't a member of a group? We're all members of a number of groups.

It's refreshing that Kahneman honestly admits that he doesn't change his mind either, and his tastes were formed when he was relatively young. He's not putting himself above the rest of humanity. He could easily say, "Well I'm a famous and distinguished scientist, so obviously my beliefs are rational, unlike everyone else", but he doesn't.

Re: Adversarial Collaboration

#34

Post by [deleted] »

anonporridge wrote: post #15
bigmatto wrote: post #3

One of the most disappointing things that I have learned is that most people hold opinions in order to be part of some group. If someone is a member of a group, it is almost not worth listening to their arguments, especially arguments in support of views held strongly by that group. They are arguing in order to maintain their group membership, not to find the truth. It appears this is true of academic and scientific…

"People don't have ideas. Ideas have people." https://wearehostsformemes.com/

[deleted]

Re: Adversarial Collaboration

#35

Post by BuyMyBitcoins »

markdown wrote: post #32
scifibestfi wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In fact that's how many get into the elite group and jockey for position within it. "Think about what it takes to claw your way into America’s elite strata. Unless you were born into the upper-middle class, your surest route is to pursue an elite education. To do that, it pays to be exquisitely sensitive to the beliefs and prejudices of the people who hold the power to grant you access to the social and cultural capi…

> for those students who come to Yale, we expect them to be versed in issues of social justice. We encourage them to be vocal when they see an opportunity for change in our institution and in the world. Would you want anything less in an academic institution? That's the entire point of places of higher learning.

I consider this meaningless fluff, or at the very least trite marketing. It reminds me of management that claims to welcome criticism with open arms and then proceeds to pay lip service to concerns while changing nothing.

Re: Adversarial Collaboration

#36

Post by irjustin »

bigmatto wrote: post #3

One of the most disappointing things that I have learned is that most people hold opinions in order to be part of some group. If someone is a member of a group, it is almost not worth listening to their arguments, especially arguments in support of views held strongly by that group. They are arguing in order to maintain their group membership, not to find the truth. It appears this is true of academic and scientific…

I agree with this. Many tend to think this is isolated to religious groups but it's just as bad in groups that present as "woke" or "enlightened".

There's a survival instinct that we can't get away from. That being in groups is innate to the core of our being and to go against the group or even change a group's mind requires potentially breaking that bond and losing the safety that the group represents.

Re: Adversarial Collaboration

#37

Post by gmnash »

agumonkey wrote: post #4
bigmatto wrote: post #3

One of the most disappointing things that I have learned is that most people hold opinions in order to be part of some group. If someone is a member of a group, it is almost not worth listening to their arguments, especially arguments in support of views held strongly by that group. They are arguing in order to maintain their group membership, not to find the truth. It appears this is true of academic and scientific…

Yes. And if someone knows books or discussions about this topic I want the names. Its such a strong force in social structures. Stating your truth is rarely possible, you better sing along and talk down in smaller sub groups later.

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/02/27/why-facts-dont...

Three mentioned in the article: * Enigma of Reason * The Knowledge Illusion * Denying to the Grave

Re: Adversarial Collaboration

#38

Post by lapcat »

ARandomerDude wrote: post #2

> Let's start from the main domains where we know people don't change their minds—politics or religion. > In politics and in religion, the main driver is social. We believe what the people we love and trust believe. Except I've changed my mind on both, despite enormous pressure by people I love not to. Also this article seems to be self-defeating: if we don't change our minds, why attempt to convince us of that fact?…

> Also this article seems to be self-defeating: if we don't change our minds, why attempt to convince us of that fact?

I don't think the point was to convince us that we don't change our minds but rather to convince us to do adversarial collaboration instead of angry science.

Re: Adversarial Collaboration

#39

Post by BuyMyBitcoins »

LeonB wrote: post #25
bearon wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then it shouldn't have been titled as so.

This is called a “rhetorical device” and you’d struggle to find a lengthy article that does not employ rhetorical devices. It’s a big part of how communication works.

I wonder if there is a term for this kind of objection. I’m starting to see more and more people demand quantifiers or conditional disqualifiers on statements that shouldn’t reasonably be considered as absolutes. And, the fact that bringing up that whatever assertion is being made is not a universal absolute doesn’t really add anything to the understanding.

Which statement is better, “people don’t like the smell of skunk spray” or “the vast majority of people do not like the smell of skunk spray”? The latter is more correct, as I am sure there is probably someone out there who is an outlier. But I can’t help but feel like my communication has been made less precise and has been made subject to interpretation as a result.

Re: Adversarial Collaboration

#40

Post by airtonix »

markdown wrote: post #32
scifibestfi wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In fact that's how many get into the elite group and jockey for position within it. "Think about what it takes to claw your way into America’s elite strata. Unless you were born into the upper-middle class, your surest route is to pursue an elite education. To do that, it pays to be exquisitely sensitive to the beliefs and prejudices of the people who hold the power to grant you access to the social and cultural capi…

> for those students who come to Yale, we expect them to be versed in issues of social justice. We encourage them to be vocal when they see an opportunity for change in our institution and in the world. Would you want anything less in an academic institution? That's the entire point of places of higher learning.

But it's not really higher learning is it?

As the parent indicated, they're not willing to even communicate with people who don't parrot their own ideas.

Post reply on HN