Difference between revisions of "Color politics"

From Lesswrongwiki
Jump to: navigation, search
m (bylines, cleanup tag)
m (Typo)
 
(One intermediate revision by one other user not shown)
Line 5: Line 5:
 
Politics commonly involves an [[adversarial process]], where factions usually identify with political positions, and use [[arguments as soldiers]] to defend their side.  When tempered by appropriate [[standard of evidence|standards of evidence]], [[rules of order]] and other safeguards, such a process may be the only way of introducing a modicum of deliberative truth seeking and other [[virtues of rationality]] into an inherently violent domain.  However, the dichotomies presented by the opposing sides are often [[false dilemma|false dilemmas]], which can be shown by presenting [[third option|third options]].
 
Politics commonly involves an [[adversarial process]], where factions usually identify with political positions, and use [[arguments as soldiers]] to defend their side.  When tempered by appropriate [[standard of evidence|standards of evidence]], [[rules of order]] and other safeguards, such a process may be the only way of introducing a modicum of deliberative truth seeking and other [[virtues of rationality]] into an inherently violent domain.  However, the dichotomies presented by the opposing sides are often [[false dilemma|false dilemmas]], which can be shown by presenting [[third option|third options]].
  
For a variery of reasons, Less Wrong tries to avoid political disputes: see [[Mind-killer]].
+
For a variety of reasons, Less Wrong tries to avoid political disputes: see [[Mind-killer]].
  
 
==Blog posts==
 
==Blog posts==
Line 11: Line 11:
 
*[http://lesswrong.com/lw/mg/the_twoparty_swindle/ The Two-Party Swindle]
 
*[http://lesswrong.com/lw/mg/the_twoparty_swindle/ The Two-Party Swindle]
 
*[http://lesswrong.com/lw/gt/a_fable_of_science_and_politics/ A Fable of Science and Politics]
 
*[http://lesswrong.com/lw/gt/a_fable_of_science_and_politics/ A Fable of Science and Politics]
*[http://lesswrong.com/lw/h2/blue_or_green_on_regulation/ Blue or Green on Regulation?] [[Burch's law]] isn't a [[scales of justice fallacy|soldier-argument]] for regulation; estimating the appropriate level of regulation in each particular case is a superior [[third option]].
+
*[http://lesswrong.com/lw/h2/blue_or_green_on_regulation/ Blue or Green on Regulation?] - [[Burch's law]] isn't a [[scales of justice fallacy|soldier-argument]] for regulation; estimating the appropriate level of regulation in each particular case is a superior [[third option]].
  
 
==See also==
 
==See also==

Latest revision as of 07:02, 16 October 2012

In articles at Overcoming Bias and Less Wrong, the words "Blues" and "Greens" are often used to refer to two opposing political factions.

The terms come from the names of chariot racing teams, that differed in nothing but the team colors, but rivalry of whose fans sometimes reached the level of gang wars.[1] By definition, politics also deals with matters that people physically fight over in the real world -- or at least, matters that are to be enforced by the government's monopoly on violence.

Politics commonly involves an adversarial process, where factions usually identify with political positions, and use arguments as soldiers to defend their side. When tempered by appropriate standards of evidence, rules of order and other safeguards, such a process may be the only way of introducing a modicum of deliberative truth seeking and other virtues of rationality into an inherently violent domain. However, the dichotomies presented by the opposing sides are often false dilemmas, which can be shown by presenting third options.

For a variety of reasons, Less Wrong tries to avoid political disputes: see Mind-killer.

Blog posts

See also

Footnotes