Personal experiences bridge moral and political divides better than facts • Hacker News Board

Re: Personal experiences bridge moral and political divides better than facts

#141

Post by somedude895 » Sun, Jan 31, 2021, 8:32 AM UTC

thewarrior wrote: post #77

dang wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I understand it correctly, the claim is not that personal experience narration is a superior form of objective information to facts, it's that sharing personal experience is more likely to create a feeling of relational connection, which in turn is more likely to lead to a shift in position. Tossing facts in an argument where people don't feel any personal connection is a bit like throwing stones at each other. Ma…

Anecdotally this seems true. Dick Cheney is a hard core neo con but having daughters who were lesbian made him a lot more understanding on the issue of gay rights. John McCain was similar but his personal experience of being a POW made him a life long advocate against torture. There’s a famous video of Christopher Hitchens who used to believe that water boarding people was justified in some cases. He volunteered to a…

Even Hitler was against employing gas warfare in WWII due to his experience with it in the Great War.

Re: Personal experiences bridge moral and political divides better than facts

#142

Post by bjourne » Sun, Jan 31, 2021, 10:16 AM UTC

thewarrior wrote: post #77

dang wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I understand it correctly, the claim is not that personal experience narration is a superior form of objective information to facts, it's that sharing personal experience is more likely to create a feeling of relational connection, which in turn is more likely to lead to a shift in position. Tossing facts in an argument where people don't feel any personal connection is a bit like throwing stones at each other. Ma…

Anecdotally this seems true. Dick Cheney is a hard core neo con but having daughters who were lesbian made him a lot more understanding on the issue of gay rights. John McCain was similar but his personal experience of being a POW made him a life long advocate against torture. There’s a famous video of Christopher Hitchens who used to believe that water boarding people was justified in some cases. He volunteered to a…

But your examples are slightly different. In those, the person changing their mind has suffered the consequences of holding a particular opinion. Have a billionaire live on the streets for a year and he will change his opinions about homelessness, subject a bully to bullying and he might stop bullying others, an anti-feminist dad with a few daughters might become a feminist, and so on.

If John McCain only had heard about others experiences being POWs had he become a life-long advocate against torture? Probably not. This has been explored in the context of political conflicts; between Boers and coloreds in South Africa, between Protestants and Catholics in Northern Ireland, and between Israel and the Palestinians. The research indicates that merely talking to someone suffering from oppression or injustice does not change one's opinion about that oppression or injustice.

Re: Personal experiences bridge moral and political divides better than facts

#143

Post by vmception » Sun, Jan 31, 2021, 11:37 AM UTC

PaulDavisThe1st wrote: post #140

vmception wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the early 2000s I went to “the south” for the first time, and on the news there was a story about a suspicious hanging of a black man ruled suicide, but his hands were tied behind his back and was dating the sheriff’s white daughter. Found out a decade later that story never happened, and it was a big enough deal for it to be in the list of urban legends and a controversy of how the news decided to report it at th…

It seems as if your story corresponds with my (2), not my (3) ?

Hm I could see that, but to me “decided to report” in this case referred to making up its own lies

Re: Personal experiences bridge moral and political divides better than facts

#144

Post by faeyanpiraat » Sun, Jan 31, 2021, 12:47 PM UTC

tchatyo wrote: post #139

hntrader wrote: post #17

What bridges divides the best is unfortunately a common enemy that has agency, which unites previously warring factions against a common outgroup. This is the unfortunate reality of our tribal brains. Just look at how this whole GME episode (common villain - hedge funds) has brought the US left and right closer together (even though the gulf remains large) than they've been in years. COVID was a missed opportunity, w…

Having a “common enemy” may be effective in bridging old divides, but it also creates a new divide. Having the common enemy of Japan in WWII was effective in uniting the US nation, but it also resulted in the persecution Japanese Americans. Someone close to me runs a hedge fund - I guess that makes him the bad guy somehow, the “common enemy.” He’s a one man operation working from home. He made a bad judgement call an…

Isnt this a scenario that a hedge fund manager should know about?

He took the risk of a short, and the market went the wrong way, there is nothing more to it.

Re: Personal experiences bridge moral and political divides better than facts

#145

Post by harimau777 » Sun, Jan 31, 2021, 1:40 PM UTC

mlthoughts2018 wrote: post #70

dang wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I understand it correctly, the claim is not that personal experience narration is a superior form of objective information to facts, it's that sharing personal experience is more likely to create a feeling of relational connection, which in turn is more likely to lead to a shift in position. Tossing facts in an argument where people don't feel any personal connection is a bit like throwing stones at each other. Ma…

I think the aspect that spans between your comment and the one you replied to is this: Why should “personal experiences” be a different category than “facts?” (even taking for granted the extra step you mentioned, where it is the use of these experiences within a discussion, not the absolute existence of the experience, at play). For example, suppose I know you and you are honest and trustworthy, so if you verbally t…

I'm not sure that my goal is to get people to believe as accurately as possible so much as it is to get other people to do the right thing. That is to say, my goal is persuasion.

Generally speaking, I also try to encourage people to believe as accurately as possible. However, as a practical matter convincing people to do that doesn't scale.

Re: Personal experiences bridge moral and political divides better than facts

#146

Post by harimau777 » Sun, Jan 31, 2021, 1:44 PM UTC

mlthoughts2018 wrote: post #82

citrablue wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It sounds like you believe people can behave more in line with the Rational Human used to model older economic theories. I'm not so sure confirmation, affinity, or proximity biases can be held down. What we need is a system that is either immune to these biases, or is designed to thwart them. My opinion: individual's actions and beliefs do not put a dent in the tsunami of bias that swamps our brains. We need systemic…

I think a precondition of the entire discussion is that we’re talking about what’s more effective in resolving disagreement - which would be measured by whether a disagreement process approaches the conclusion that would be reached between two rational agents sharing their information. Note that I am not saying I believe humans do act that way, rather that is the yardstick of outcome to decide if one disagreement res…

Maybe the issue is different views of what the disagreement is over?

I tend to view the disagreement as being over policy not over rationalism/facts. If at the end of the discussion both people agree on the policy I see that as successful even if they still disagree on the evidence that supports that policy.

Re: Personal experiences bridge moral and political divides better than facts

#147

Post by Damorian » Sun, Jan 31, 2021, 2:12 PM UTC

nobody9999 wrote: post #130

Damorian wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>false realities Or just other people's realities. You mention BLM riots, which affected me a great deal; tens of millions in damages to my city, destruction of local landmarks, one of the teachers in my local school district was arrested for assaulting a state politician for recording them burning a police car, and to top it off, they smashed the pharmacy where I get my wife's medicine, so she had to go without for…

>This was my experience so when people tell me they were "peaceful protests" or the news says "statistically, they were 99.99999999% peaceful" but I look at what I saw with my own eyes, and also what was on TV in other cities... I can't be convinced that they weren't violent, destructive, and plainly, evil, no matter how much other people tell me what to think. Your point is well taken. I live in a large city. The ar…

Normally I'd agree, but I'll point you to comments elsewhere in this thread as to why this is misleading. The amount of damage is huge, and this was excused all the while by the group's leaders and other "peaceful" supporters with "people > property" and similar logic. Using this same logic, I'm sure 99+% of Nazis were peaceful during the holocaust as well.

Re: Personal experiences bridge moral and political divides better than facts

#148

Post by Damorian » Sun, Jan 31, 2021, 2:13 PM UTC

dang wrote: post #135

Damorian wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hope you understand how unreasonable you sound to me. You're telling me that what I both saw and experienced, with verified fact and video evidence, isn't real . Your conviction that you know more about me and my life, than me, and your insistence on how invalid it is, makes you sound, frankly, like some sort of political zealot. I tend not to waste my time convincing other people of things to this degree. I will s…

Please do not perpetuate flamewars on HN and do not cross into personal attack yourself. It's not what this site is for and it's no ok here. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

I'm respectfully exchanging ideas. I challenge you to find my personal attacks. Please do not blame me for the content other users post.

Re: Personal experiences bridge moral and political divides better than facts

#149

Post by nobody9999 » Sun, Jan 31, 2021, 2:55 PM UTC

Damorian wrote: post #147

nobody9999 wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>This was my experience so when people tell me they were "peaceful protests" or the news says "statistically, they were 99.99999999% peaceful" but I look at what I saw with my own eyes, and also what was on TV in other cities... I can't be convinced that they weren't violent, destructive, and plainly, evil, no matter how much other people tell me what to think. Your point is well taken. I live in a large city. The ar…

Normally I'd agree, but I'll point you to comments elsewhere in this thread as to why this is misleading. The amount of damage is huge, and this was excused all the while by the group's leaders and other "peaceful" supporters with "people > property" and similar logic. Using this same logic, I'm sure 99+% of Nazis were peaceful during the holocaust as well.

>this was excused all the while by the group's leaders and other "peaceful" supporters

Who? Specifically. This is important. AFAIK, no reasonable, law-abiding people advocated for or excused violence and destruction.

In fact, such violence was roundly criticized and there were calls from all quarters for the apprehension and prosecution of anyone committing violent acts.

I've heard the same refrain over and over again. But no one ever actually names names. So. Who are these people who actually advocated for violence and destruction during the protests last summer?

That isn't a rhetorical question, friend.

Re: Personal experiences bridge moral and political divides better than facts

#150

Post by wl » Sun, Jan 31, 2021, 3:24 PM UTC

nobody9999 wrote: post #149

Damorian wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Normally I'd agree, but I'll point you to comments elsewhere in this thread as to why this is misleading. The amount of damage is huge, and this was excused all the while by the group's leaders and other "peaceful" supporters with "people > property" and similar logic. Using this same logic, I'm sure 99+% of Nazis were peaceful during the holocaust as well.

>this was excused all the while by the group's leaders and other "peaceful" supporters Who? Specifically. This is important. AFAIK, no reasonable, law-abiding people advocated for or excused violence and destruction. In fact, such violence was roundly criticized and there were calls from all quarters for the apprehension and prosecution of anyone committing violent acts. I've heard the same refrain over and over agai…

I posted a status update the morning after a major riot happened in my neighborhood that consisted of a short summary of what happened, a statement that I was ok, and essentially "fuck the rioters." I could name names of friends who, in response, insisted on "people > property", "fuck the racist capitalist system", "rioting is language of the unheard", "looting is reparations," and "don't tell black people how to protest." I'm sure you can find examples of this on twitter and reddit if you look—it was unavoidable for a time.

Since I'm not willing to out my friends or comb through old social media, have an example from local media instead: https://www.wbez.org/stories/winning-has-come-through-revolt...

Also, an image macro posted to my wall, representative of the kinds of stuff I was seeing at the time: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EnCI4_9W4AAAxDf.jpg