The Less Wrong blog is devoted to refining the art of human rationality, not conflict reduction, de-escalation or mediation. Successfully mediating a political dispute requires real-world skills and virtues which go far beyond the virtues of rationality; many of these political virtues were identified by Bernard Crick in his work In Defense of Politics. Unfortunately, shifting our focus to these activities would encourage fallacious analogies in private or deliberative decision making, which would defeat the site's purpose. Extending this site's mission to deal with overtly political deliberation remains an open problem.
In addition, there seems tomay well be a tensegritybalance of tensions between evaporative cooling of beliefs leading to groupthink, and extremely biased color politics. However, this is an underexplored issue.
The Less Wrong blog is devoted to refining the art of human rationality, not conflict reduction, de-escalation or mediation. Successfully mediating a political dispute requires real-world skills and virtues which go far beyond the virtues of rationality; many of these political virtues were identified by Bernard Crick in his work In Defense of Politics. Unfortunately, shifting our focus to these activities would encourage fallacious analogies in private or deliberative decision making, which would defeat the site's purpose.Extending this site's mission to deal with overtly political deliberation remains an open problem.
For all of these reasons, Less Wrong does not concern itself withtries to avoid particular political disputes. Of course, discussing conflict reduction skills in the abstract is appropriate and encouraged! In fact, it is the best way of preserving our deliberative, rationalist focus in the face of small-scale disputes and conflicts.
In addition, there seems to be a tensegrity between evaporative cooling of beliefs leading to groupthink, and extremely biased color politics. However, this is an underexplored issue.
Politics is one obvious cause of mind-killer disputes: Political disputes are not limited to standard disagreements about factual matters, nor to disputes of personality or perspective or even faction: they involve matters that people physically fight over in the real world—or at least, matters that are to be enforced by the government's monopoly of violence. Accordingly, political discourse generally involves an adversarial process where careful deliberation is forgone; the focus shifts ononto conflict management and on using arguments as soldiers to advance one's side.
It may be particularly important for Less Wrong to encourage a rational perspective with respect to these contentious topics. Nevertheless, introducing these topics into an otherwise healthy discussion (for example, to present an analogy) may ruin it, encouraging fallacious modes of thinking.
It may be particularly important for Less Wrong to encourage a rational perspective with respect to these contentious topics. Nevertheless, introducing these topics into an otherwise healthy discussion (for example, to present an analogy) may ruin it, encouraging fallacious modes of thinking.
Successfully mediating a political dispute requires real-world skills and virtues which go far beyond the virtues of rationality. Many of these political virtues were identified by Bernard Crick in his work In Defense of Politics.
The Less Wrong blog is devoted to refining the art of human rationality, not conflict reduction, de-escalation or mediation. ShiftingSuccessfully mediating a political dispute requires real-world skills and virtues which go far beyond the virtues of rationality; many of these political virtues were identified by Bernard Crick in his work In Defense of Politics. Unfortunately, shifting our focus to these activities would encourage fallacious ways of thinkinganalogies in private or deliberative decision making, which would defeat the site's purpose.
For all of these reasons, Less Wrong does not concern itself with particular political disputes. Of course, discussing conflict reduction skills in the abstract is appropriate and encouraged! In fact, it is the best way of preserving our deliberative, rationalist focus in the face of small-scale disputes and conflicts.
Unfortunately, the Less Wrong blog is devoted to refining the art of human rationality, not conflict reduction, de-escalation or mediation. Successfully mediating a political dispute requires real-world skills and virtues which go far beyond the virtues of rationality. Many of these political virtues were identified by Bernard Crick in his work In Defense of Politics.
The Less Wrong blog is devoted to refining the art of human rationality, not conflict reduction, de-escalation or mediation. Shifting our focus to these activities would encourage fallacious ways of thinking in private or deliberative decision making, which would defeat the site's purpose.
As a consequence, we mayWe should expect that existing political allegiances of our users will add bias to such discussions. Politically-motivated people may also come here to Less Wrong in order to diligently reduce their casualties and add more recruits to their side.
Unfortunately, the Less Wrong blog is devoted to refining the art of human rationality, not conflict reduction, de-escalation or mediation. Successfully mediating a political dispute requires real-world skills and virtues which go far beyond the virtues of rationality. Many of these "political virtues"political virtues were identified by Bernard Crick in his work In Defense of Politics.
Politics is one obvious cause of mind-killer disputes: Political disputes are not limited to standard disagreements about factual matters, nor to disputes of personality or perspective or even faction: they involve matters that people physically fight over in the real world—or at least, matters that are to be enforced by the government's monopoly of violence. Accordingly, political discourse generally involves an adversarial process, where careful deliberation is forgone; the focus shifts on conflict management and on using arguments as soldiers to advance one's side.
Politics is one obvious cause of mind-killer disputes: Political disputes are not limited to standard disagreements about factual matters, nor to disputes of personality or perspective or even faction: they involve matters that people physically fight over in the real world—or at least, matters that are to be enforced by the government's monopoly of violence. Accordingly, political discourse generally involves an adversarial process, where careful deliberation is forgone; the focus shifts on conflict management and on using arguments as soldiers to advance one's faction.side.
Politics is one obvious cause of mind-killer disputes: Political disputes are not limited to standard disagreements about factual matters, nor to disputes of personality or perspective or even faction: they involve matters that people physically fight over in the real world—or at least, matters that are to be enforced by the government's monopoly of violence. Accordingly, politically-political discourse generally involves an adversarial process, where careful deliberation is forgone; the focus shifts on conflict management and on using arguments as soldiers to advance one's faction.
As a consequence, we may expect that existing political allegiances of our users will add bias to such discussions. Politically-motivated people may also come here to Less Wrong in order to diligently reduce their casualties and add more recruits to their side.
Unfortunately, the Less Wrong blog is devoted to refining the art of human rationality, not conflict reduction, de-escalation or mediation. Successfully mediating a political dispute is clearly beyond our scope, sincerequires real-world skills and virtues are required which go far beyond rationality.the virtues of rationality. Many of these virtues"political virtues" were identified by Bernard Crick in his work In Defense of Politics.
__NOTOC__