Seems somewhat of an odd tagline "why good people are divided by politics"...
All people are divided by politics.
Perhaps it's one to give a read though.
I swear I'm noticing a systemic failure at a global level of people to recognize they are always-on 24/7 political machines living inside an always-on 24/7 political machine and it's mostly Garbage In, Garbage Out.
That's the default mode of operation. Most people are wrong about most things. Couple that with the fact we are de-facto tribal animals that can't turn our politics off. All you get is one big, giant disagreement where everyone is likely wrong and nobody will admit it.
But I keep noticing patterns in everyones language... Patterns that make an assumption that the crazy political debates we find ourselves in are somehow an abnormal state and the world has "descended into madness" or "we've gone mad" or "it seems people have really lost their minds lately".
This pattern crops up over and over again. It's like no man, look at the hardware and software producing the outputs. This is the output the system is designed to produce. We haven't "lost our minds" or "gone crazy", we were always this batshit insane and this is always the protocol we have operated on.
Curious what the framework the book lays out and what resemblance it bears to my own framework...
Right but "good" itself is a moral/value judgement, so you wind up with the question "who is doing the defining?" And that descends into a disagreement. That is our M.O.
Actually looking at description of this book and some of the reviews it's basically what I'm saying. Though my thesis contains a large component centering around our complete inability to calculate the truth value of most truth claims a priori and our inability to recognize that leads us to being utterly convinced our erroneous conclusions are correct and getting angry at people who disagree with us. This coupled with all the literature on how dissenters are treated and how groupthink takes hold. We are a walking recipe for disaster.
This will make for a good read. Probably help me to expand on my own model even more.
I think a lot of turmoil and confusion could be avoided if we collectively upgraded our protocols for dealing with each other.
The point of the tag line is to humanize people on the other political side from you.
> Curious what the framework the book lays out and what resemblance it bears to my own framework...
I haven't read the book but I assume it follows the framework the author developed (he's a moral psychology academic, I believe) and laid out in a TED talk a while ago (back when they were still good). If you're curious about it, check out the talk on YouTube.
All people are divided by politics.
Perhaps it's one to give a read though.
I swear I'm noticing a systemic failure at a global level of people to recognize they are always-on 24/7 political machines living inside an always-on 24/7 political machine and it's mostly Garbage In, Garbage Out.
That's the default mode of operation. Most people are wrong about most things. Couple that with the fact we are de-facto tribal animals that can't turn our politics off. All you get is one big, giant disagreement where everyone is likely wrong and nobody will admit it.
But I keep noticing patterns in everyones language... Patterns that make an assumption that the crazy political debates we find ourselves in are somehow an abnormal state and the world has "descended into madness" or "we've gone mad" or "it seems people have really lost their minds lately".
This pattern crops up over and over again. It's like no man, look at the hardware and software producing the outputs. This is the output the system is designed to produce. We haven't "lost our minds" or "gone crazy", we were always this batshit insane and this is always the protocol we have operated on.
Curious what the framework the book lays out and what resemblance it bears to my own framework...