The difference between whites and blacks is a rounding error. A while back there was a minor scandal over JournoLista private group where left-leaning journalists met and exchanged ideas. Feminists would probably like to start supercharging the true rape accusations for a change. And if they want viewers and ad money, the media will go along with him.
On the other hand, the controversy over dubious rape allegations is exactly that — a controversy. Race relations are at historic lows not because white people and black people disagree on very much, but because the media absolutely worked its tuchus off to find the single issue that white people and black people disagreed over the most and ensure that it was the only issue anybody would talk about.
You can always try debating these points further.
I even think it can sometimes be helpful to argue about which side is the underdog. For example, a Catholic man who opposes the use of condoms demonstrates to others and to himself!
So the cost of people not being able to defend themselves might be greater than the benefit of fewer criminals being able to commit crimes.
They try to convince you. Sometimes these can be more complicated and ambiguous.
Posts about charity which only get me 2, paying customers? Several people have remarked that false accusers have more leeway to make their stories as outrageous and spectacular as possible.
Media opinion follows much the same pattern. First, they can respond to rape in a restrained and responsible way, in which case everyone will be against it and nobody will talk about it. In the same way, publicizing how strongly you believe an accusation that is obviously true signals nothing.
The other day I saw this on Twitter: On any controversial issue, there are usually many peer-reviewed studies supporting each side. Here is a graph of some of the tags I commonly use for my posts, with the average number of hits per post in each tag.
Like PETA, their incentive gradient dooms them to shoot themselves in the foot again and again. And now, after all is said and done, ninety percent of people are still in favor — given methodology issues, the extra ten percent may or may not represent a real increase.
An engine that creates money by burning the few remaining shreds of cooperation, bipartisanship and social trust. Everybody hates rape just like everybody hates factory farming.
Imagine Moloch, in his Carthaginian-demon personification, looking out over the expanse of the world, eagle-eyed for anything that can turn brother against brother and husband against wife. These are fast, responsive, and only just beginning to discover the power of controversy.
Everything below that is either a show or some form of mistake; everything above it is impossible to avoid no matter how great you are. Since kitten pic sharers cluster together in the social network, soon every kitten pic sharer has seen the insult against kitten pic sharer — as they all feel the need to add their defensive commentary to it, soon all of them are seeing it from ten different directions.
Overall I think that would be worth it.InPaul Graham wrote How To Disagree Better, ranking arguments on a scale from name-calling to explicitly refuting the other person’s central point.
And that’s why, ever sinceInternet arguments have generally been civil and productive. Graham’s hierarchy is useful for its intended purpose, but it isn’t really a hierarchy of disagreements.
I think the heuristics against “taking advantage of people’s misery” makes sense, because sometimes there are situations where some people cause other people’s misery in order to take advantage of it later. We certainly want to prevent that.Download