Given various links and references I’ve seen around this sub, I have no doubt many sneerers are already familiar with this video, but for those who aren’t, it is an excellent examination of rhetorical patterns I’ve noticed in the comments of SSC and it’s subreddit.
There is even an explicit mention of “people who identify as ‘rationalists’”, and the video theorizes that the usual logical chain of:
When I am presented with the truth, I will believe it.
I will defend the truth in argument.
Repeat if necessary.
This is a rational method of thinking.
Therefore, I am a rationalist.
Sometimes gets turned on its head to become:
I am a rationalist.
If I am arguing in favor of this position, then I must believe it.
If I believe this argument, because I am a rationalist, it must be true.
Obviously this doesn’t describe all (or likely even most) people associated with SSC (the video is from the “Alt-Right Playbook”, not the “Rationalist” or even “Neoreactionary” Playbook), but it was eye-opening to hear someone articulate something I couldn’t quite put my finger on, and then see it in action so frequently.
I’ve watched a couple of these videos now with great interest, after many recommendations, and I’m sorry to say I don’t really like them - they seem to spend way too much time describing the secret motivations and mental states of other people according to the disparate statements of a few loud ones, which is the same thing that’s so annoying when some on the other side do it (I’ve heard one too many right-wing talk radio hosts telling their listeners how “liberals” think). But whatever goes on in the minds of actual people, I’ve definitely observed all of these behaviors firsthand, and they’re worth discussing, and this discussion is interesting, so it’s mostly a problem of rhetorical framing.
Despite that complaint, the author does hit many nails squarely on the head, and one of them is the point about anonymity and poor moderation (6:36, which is a borrowed observation). If anything, chan culture actually rewards people for posting edgy offensive opinions. The old SSC Culture War threads (I haven’t seen the new whatever and don’t care to) did pretty much the same thing, in a different way: people expressed a genuine belief that they were creating a better Marketplace of Ideas by going out of their way to welcome the ones that are shunned by polite society. This seems endemic and maybe inherent to Rationalism, and the consequences for its political discourse are pretty much the same as if they actively invited in other fringe ideas like vaccine myths or creationism or climate denialism (oh wait, I think some of them did fall for that one) among laypeople who are ill-equipped to answer those questions. If anything maybe it’s worse because people genuinely believe this is giving them a worthwhile intellectual exchange rather than just lulz.
Yeah, I watched the video a few days ago, and again today, and there’s a real echo with SSCers (as well as a lot of other alt-right/NRx/etc. people).
Also you need a space after you ‘*’ to make a bullet point.
Also, that “the card says Moops” scene from Seinfield is hilarious.
Edit: also maybe please tag this NSFW.