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

Preventing extreme polarization of political attitudes

pnas.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 316 posts

Re: Preventing extreme polarization of political attitudes

#41

Post by fallingknife »

RandomLensman wrote: post #37
kstenerud wrote: post #22

It's an interesting paper, but unfortunately it misses the point. Polar dissimilar political beliefs are not the problem. Many countries have this, and even have lively political discussions that remain civil, rallies that remain civil, and elections that remain civil. The actual problem is psychological, specifically dealing with identity beliefs. Once a person takes on a belief as part of their identity, any attack…

That still does not explain why such identity beliefs appear to be spreading. My own hypothesis is that most things are now too complex for most people, i.e., how things work is largely "magic". This then might allow people to actually belief a lot more things as a lot of how the real world works is already untethered from reality for them.

That has been the case since the industrial revolution, though. My theory is that political affiliation has taken the place of religion. Particularly on the left, but you can see a lot of it happening on the right now too since Christianity has declined in influence in the Republican party.

Re: Preventing extreme polarization of political attitudes

#42

Post by RandomLensman »

fallingknife wrote: post #41
RandomLensman wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That still does not explain why such identity beliefs appear to be spreading. My own hypothesis is that most things are now too complex for most people, i.e., how things work is largely "magic". This then might allow people to actually belief a lot more things as a lot of how the real world works is already untethered from reality for them.

That has been the case since the industrial revolution, though. My theory is that political affiliation has taken the place of religion. Particularly on the left, but you can see a lot of it happening on the right now too since Christianity has declined in influence in the Republican party.

Not sure that is totally true since the industrial revolution. 50 years ago when learning how to drive there was a lot of learning on how a car works, for example. That is completely gone now.

Re: Preventing extreme polarization of political attitudes

#43

Post by soco »

RandomLensman wrote: post #37
kstenerud wrote: post #22

It's an interesting paper, but unfortunately it misses the point. Polar dissimilar political beliefs are not the problem. Many countries have this, and even have lively political discussions that remain civil, rallies that remain civil, and elections that remain civil. The actual problem is psychological, specifically dealing with identity beliefs. Once a person takes on a belief as part of their identity, any attack…

That still does not explain why such identity beliefs appear to be spreading. My own hypothesis is that most things are now too complex for most people, i.e., how things work is largely "magic". This then might allow people to actually belief a lot more things as a lot of how the real world works is already untethered from reality for them.

Look around: social media is pervasive and most (all?) of its goals are to propagate conflicting views, as they are the one bringing the holy click. Division is a logical consequence of that and no social media company feels at all responsible. Yeah one can (and not wrongly) blame the human nature but so far we've been able to enact laws to protect us against some other human nature shortcomings - we call them "crimes".

Re: Preventing extreme polarization of political attitudes

#44

Post by RandomLensman »

soco wrote: post #43
RandomLensman wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That still does not explain why such identity beliefs appear to be spreading. My own hypothesis is that most things are now too complex for most people, i.e., how things work is largely "magic". This then might allow people to actually belief a lot more things as a lot of how the real world works is already untethered from reality for them.

Look around: social media is pervasive and most (all?) of its goals are to propagate conflicting views, as they are the one bringing the holy click. Division is a logical consequence of that and no social media company feels at all responsible. Yeah one can (and not wrongly) blame the human nature but so far we've been able to enact laws to protect us against some other human nature shortcomings - we call them "crime…

Conflicting belief systems and views with massive real world consequences far predate current social media, hence I struggle with the idea of social media being the sole causal agent/accelerant. And social media also do seem to impact different societies differently. On top, the US has had a real world "violence problem" for a long time (even compared to societies with similar levels of gun ownership), i.e., I would not discount specific societal factors.

Re: Preventing extreme polarization of political attitudes

#45

Post by jrumbut »

RandomLensman wrote: post #37
kstenerud wrote: post #22

It's an interesting paper, but unfortunately it misses the point. Polar dissimilar political beliefs are not the problem. Many countries have this, and even have lively political discussions that remain civil, rallies that remain civil, and elections that remain civil. The actual problem is psychological, specifically dealing with identity beliefs. Once a person takes on a belief as part of their identity, any attack…

That still does not explain why such identity beliefs appear to be spreading. My own hypothesis is that most things are now too complex for most people, i.e., how things work is largely "magic". This then might allow people to actually belief a lot more things as a lot of how the real world works is already untethered from reality for them.

I don't quite understand this argument. Our ancestors were able to get themselves very polarized in their (technologically) simpler times. They believed really wild and counterproductive things too.

We have increased in our polarization compared to 25 years ago, but compared to the many civil wars across time and space we aren't so bad (yet we are at peak incomprehensibility).

Re: Preventing extreme polarization of political attitudes

#46

Post by soco »

RandomLensman wrote: post #44
soco wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Look around: social media is pervasive and most (all?) of its goals are to propagate conflicting views, as they are the one bringing the holy click. Division is a logical consequence of that and no social media company feels at all responsible. Yeah one can (and not wrongly) blame the human nature but so far we've been able to enact laws to protect us against some other human nature shortcomings - we call them "crime…

Conflicting belief systems and views with massive real world consequences far predate current social media, hence I struggle with the idea of social media being the sole causal agent/accelerant. And social media also do seem to impact different societies differently. On top, the US has had a real world "violence problem" for a long time (even compared to societies with similar levels of gun ownership), i.e., I would…

The "sole" - that's what nobody said.

Re: Preventing extreme polarization of political attitudes

#47

Post by collaborative »

fallingknife wrote: post #41
RandomLensman wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That still does not explain why such identity beliefs appear to be spreading. My own hypothesis is that most things are now too complex for most people, i.e., how things work is largely "magic". This then might allow people to actually belief a lot more things as a lot of how the real world works is already untethered from reality for them.

That has been the case since the industrial revolution, though. My theory is that political affiliation has taken the place of religion. Particularly on the left, but you can see a lot of it happening on the right now too since Christianity has declined in influence in the Republican party.

Spot on. At the end of the day it's a lot less harmful to worship an invisible being than an idealised visible entity

Re: Preventing extreme polarization of political attitudes

#48

Post by RandomLensman »

jrumbut wrote: post #45
RandomLensman wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That still does not explain why such identity beliefs appear to be spreading. My own hypothesis is that most things are now too complex for most people, i.e., how things work is largely "magic". This then might allow people to actually belief a lot more things as a lot of how the real world works is already untethered from reality for them.

I don't quite understand this argument. Our ancestors were able to get themselves very polarized in their (technologically) simpler times. They believed really wild and counterproductive things too. We have increased in our polarization compared to 25 years ago, but compared to the many civil wars across time and space we aren't so bad (yet we are at peak incomprehensibility).

Exactly, and in those simpler times a lot of things where indeed pretty much assumed to be Devine/magic etc. Back then things where also very incomprehensible otherwise.

So my point is we are going back to that stage after a short "interregnum" where the machines in our daily lives where somewhat more comprehensible.

Re: Preventing extreme polarization of political attitudes

#49

Post by idontwantthis »

Polarization in America: One side invaded the capital building in a violent attempt to overthrow democracy, and the other side wants to make voting for whoever you want as easy as possible.

Guess which pole I’m at and tell me how I should meet the other pole in the middle.

Re: Preventing extreme polarization of political attitudes

#50

Post by bellyfullofbac »

RandomLensman wrote: post #37
kstenerud wrote: post #22

It's an interesting paper, but unfortunately it misses the point. Polar dissimilar political beliefs are not the problem. Many countries have this, and even have lively political discussions that remain civil, rallies that remain civil, and elections that remain civil. The actual problem is psychological, specifically dealing with identity beliefs. Once a person takes on a belief as part of their identity, any attack…

That still does not explain why such identity beliefs appear to be spreading. My own hypothesis is that most things are now too complex for most people, i.e., how things work is largely "magic". This then might allow people to actually belief a lot more things as a lot of how the real world works is already untethered from reality for them.

> why such identity beliefs appear to be spreading

There's a loneliness epidemic (even before the *-demic words became used for something else...), my theory is that lonely people were looking for a tribe to feel a sense of belonging and found political tribes to be one.

It also seems to me people take a lot of political positions not because they believe it, but because "the other side" takes the opposing view. Anything the "enemy" likes, I don't support. But the root cause would be to find that sense of belonging. Or it'd be because of insecurity: if I think the other side have idiotic opinions, I can walk around having the smug feeling of supremacy, and hey, at least I feel better, right?

It's the same issue with second generation Muslim migrants in Western Europe who feel "lost" and then found Jihad, they'd start as troubled youths who were shoplifters, who end up in jail, find the charismatic hate-preacher/Imam there and then are inspired and find their lives' cause, which is sadly Jihad. IMO white supremacist terrorists go through the same motions.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qlbirlSA-dc or a text that's the same idea (by the same guy): https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2010/jul/19...

Post reply on HN