this post was submitted on 19 Sep 2024
56 points (91.2% liked)
askchapo
22841 readers
413 users here now
Ask Hexbear is the place to ask and answer ~~thought-provoking~~ questions.
Rules:
-
Posts must ask a question.
-
If the question asked is serious, answer seriously.
-
Questions where you want to learn more about socialism are allowed, but questions in bad faith are not.
-
Try !feedback@hexbear.net if you're having questions about regarding moderation, site policy, the site itself, development, volunteering or the mod team.
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I think a big contributing factor is the articles they read are written in a way to make them feel as though they are "intellectually grappling with" the material and developing "nuance" when really it was just a bunch of keys jangling in front of their face. I read a really good essay at one point about how Scott Alexander (the last psychiatrist guy) structures his essays in this way to make you feel as though you're being really thoughtful while not doing any thinking whatsoever. Malcolm Gladwell also has this style. This is a deep cut but it reminds me of this silicon valley triumphalist tweet from 2015:
It's all in the end line. "Something interesting is happening" - that is the ultimate vibe of the liberal article. What is interesting about it? What is a tangible conclusion? It just throws a bunch of phenomena at you then does not actually analyze it. But because you learned of all these disparate phenomena then drew conceptual similarities between them you have done a thought. Libs learn that this is what public intellectualism looks like.
This is like when
s feel smart after finishing a video game puzzle that was specifically curated to be solved and make them feel smart lol.
Maybe even lower than gamer mentality.
Every time I solve a particularly difficult puzzle in a video game, before I start feeling too big for my britches I remind myself that the hard part of puzzle design is making puzzles that are easy enough to be solved.
Yeah, exactly! They complain about "hand holding" in games as if non-verbal game design directions aren't the same thing but without words.
If they play a game that's not player-centric in its design they complain with "it's objectively bad game design" or "it's not fair, and thus bad".
Understanding what make game good make gamer brain hurt. Where boobies?
reminds me of this line from fancy lad's polemic against The Economist
How The Economist Thinks | Current Affairs
Rent seeking. What a fucking dunce that guy is
"
much to consider!" is the start and endpoint for most of this shit
Liberals are experts at aping the mannerisms of intellectualism without any of the substance
I've seen almost those exact words in nearly that exact order for LLM apologia, too.
Adam Curtis voiceover:
Yeah Adam Curtis docs are an example of this unfortunately, even though people here like them for the vibe. One time I watched hypernormalization and felt blown away, then I tried to explain it to a friend and realized I could not identify any actual thesis from the film.