We hear "cultural group" all the time, explain things with "culture" but we lack the rational definition of it. Wikipedia can't help since it redirects "cultural group" to "ethnic group" and we clearly can't call gaming alliances, or the gaming community itself an ethnic group.
It is also not equal to "community" or "interest group". One can be a baseball fan and a WoW player, while you can't be a liberal and a Tea Party member at the same time. Being part of a culture is more than doing something together. It's more than believing something together since many people can believe the same thing. Being in TEST helped me a lot to understand it.
Being in a cultural group means having the same logical fallacies accepted and protected by declarations and taboos. If you are member of the fundamentalist Islam, you support or at least find acceptable, that the Saudi religious police hindered rescue of schoolgirls from a building on fire because they were not dressed in religious clothing. If you are a fundamentalist Christian, you support the Irish medical authorities that refused to abort a terminally ill foetus leading the death of the woman (and the foetus of course). If you are not member of either culture, you find both deaths similarly avoidable and the people involved similarly responsible for the deaths. However those who accept the norms of either culture find their "own" death tragic accident that could not be prevented while agree with us about the other. To not just hit on the religious people some more easily avoidable deaths: transplantation from criminals is unacceptable even in western countries where their execution is accepted, obviously killing those who could receive these organs. China has no such moral problems, saving lot of people.
So members of a cultural group agree that certain actions and thoughts are impossible, while those who are not members find them doable (even if not smart). Cultural groups are collections of social people whose irrational beliefs align. These groups are naturally at war with other cultural groups and find each other evil. All these groups find rational people evil for not following the norms of either one. They are all vehement and altruist supporters of their nonsense and actively hate and fight those who don't accept these.
Those who challenge the logical fallacies that are obvious from the outside are the provocateurs (trolls). They do nothing and could be ignored yet the members of the culture are unable to do so and fight vehemently. From the outside it seems that the troll was harmless (even if stupid) while the "trolled" members of the culture are actively hateful and criminal. For example drawing idiotic cartoons is just idiotic and the world is full of stupid drawings and we ignore them all. Yet when certain cartoons were drawn about Muhammad, the prophet of Islam, Islamic fundamentalists caused riots leading to hundreds of deaths. While they clearly consider it a just response, everyone else see it as savage and unwarranted act. They say "if I were them I'd just ignore those idiot cartoons instead of killing like savages". Many of them of course are lying and go full outraged at something equally harmless: some idiot uttering the words "there was no Holocaust".
Trolls are probably the most effective tool against these dense and harmful groups of socials, much more effective than politically correct logical debaters because they can just be ignored by the group. The point is that they can't ignore the troll since he doesn't debate their rule but actively breaks it. So when you see a bunch of socials together believing in the same nonsense and you want to do something about it, don't try to convince them, they'll ignore you. Just do what they find impossible/evil and ask "where is your God now?!"
If you want to fight the socials, wear the mask proudly:
It is also not equal to "community" or "interest group". One can be a baseball fan and a WoW player, while you can't be a liberal and a Tea Party member at the same time. Being part of a culture is more than doing something together. It's more than believing something together since many people can believe the same thing. Being in TEST helped me a lot to understand it.
Being in a cultural group means having the same logical fallacies accepted and protected by declarations and taboos. If you are member of the fundamentalist Islam, you support or at least find acceptable, that the Saudi religious police hindered rescue of schoolgirls from a building on fire because they were not dressed in religious clothing. If you are a fundamentalist Christian, you support the Irish medical authorities that refused to abort a terminally ill foetus leading the death of the woman (and the foetus of course). If you are not member of either culture, you find both deaths similarly avoidable and the people involved similarly responsible for the deaths. However those who accept the norms of either culture find their "own" death tragic accident that could not be prevented while agree with us about the other. To not just hit on the religious people some more easily avoidable deaths: transplantation from criminals is unacceptable even in western countries where their execution is accepted, obviously killing those who could receive these organs. China has no such moral problems, saving lot of people.
So members of a cultural group agree that certain actions and thoughts are impossible, while those who are not members find them doable (even if not smart). Cultural groups are collections of social people whose irrational beliefs align. These groups are naturally at war with other cultural groups and find each other evil. All these groups find rational people evil for not following the norms of either one. They are all vehement and altruist supporters of their nonsense and actively hate and fight those who don't accept these.
Those who challenge the logical fallacies that are obvious from the outside are the provocateurs (trolls). They do nothing and could be ignored yet the members of the culture are unable to do so and fight vehemently. From the outside it seems that the troll was harmless (even if stupid) while the "trolled" members of the culture are actively hateful and criminal. For example drawing idiotic cartoons is just idiotic and the world is full of stupid drawings and we ignore them all. Yet when certain cartoons were drawn about Muhammad, the prophet of Islam, Islamic fundamentalists caused riots leading to hundreds of deaths. While they clearly consider it a just response, everyone else see it as savage and unwarranted act. They say "if I were them I'd just ignore those idiot cartoons instead of killing like savages". Many of them of course are lying and go full outraged at something equally harmless: some idiot uttering the words "there was no Holocaust".
Trolls are probably the most effective tool against these dense and harmful groups of socials, much more effective than politically correct logical debaters because they can just be ignored by the group. The point is that they can't ignore the troll since he doesn't debate their rule but actively breaks it. So when you see a bunch of socials together believing in the same nonsense and you want to do something about it, don't try to convince them, they'll ignore you. Just do what they find impossible/evil and ask "where is your God now?!"
If you want to fight the socials, wear the mask proudly:
0 comments:
Post a Comment