What's Our Problem?

1. The human mind is a battleground between Higher and Primitive thinking

The Primitive Mind and Higher Mind are a funny pair. When things are going well, the inside of your head looks like this:

Cognitive dissonance. Our minds are constantly torn between rational, evidence-based thinking (Higher Mind) and emotionally-driven, instinctual reactions (Primitive Mind). This internal struggle manifests in how we form beliefs, make decisions, and interact with others. The Higher Mind seeks truth and is open to changing views based on new information, while the Primitive Mind clings to existing beliefs and resists change.

The Ladder of thinking. Urban introduces the concept of a "Ladder" to visualize different levels of thinking:

• Top rungs: Scientist (open-minded, evidence-based)
• Middle rungs: Sports Fan (biased but open to change)
• Lower rungs: Attorney (defending a position) and Zealot (closed-minded)

Understanding this framework helps us recognize our own thought patterns and strive for higher-quality thinking in our personal lives and public discourse.

2. Social ecosystems shape our behavior and can foster or hinder rational discourse

Idea Labs are the perfect boxing ring for that testing.

Intellectual environments matter. The social contexts we inhabit significantly influence our thinking patterns and willingness to engage in open dialogue. Urban contrasts two types of intellectual environments:

1. Idea Labs:

   • Foster open debate and disagreement
   • Value evidence and changing minds
   • Encourage intellectual growth

2. Echo Chambers:

   • Reinforce existing beliefs
   • Discourage dissent
   • Prioritize group cohesion over truth-seeking

Emergence and giants. Groups of people can form larger entities with emergent properties:

• Genies: Collaborative, high-rung thinking systems that seek truth
• Golems: Rigid, low-rung thinking systems that prioritize conformity and power

The health of a society depends on maintaining a balance between these forces and fostering environments that promote rational discourse.

3. Political polarization has intensified, creating a "hypercharged tribalism"

Hypercharged tribalism happens when a concentrated tribal divide reaches such intensity that it resembles a religious war, subsuming the entire society and the people within it.

Societal shifts. Several factors have contributed to increased political polarization in recent decades:

• Geographic sorting: People increasingly live near others who share their political views
• Media fragmentation: Rise of partisan news sources and social media echo chambers
• Decline of shared institutions and experiences

Binary thinking. This polarization has led to a simplistic, "us vs. them" mentality in politics:

• Complex issues reduced to good/evil dichotomies
• Demonization of political opponents
• Unwillingness to compromise or see nuance

The result is a political landscape that resembles warring tribes more than a functioning democracy, hindering effective governance and social progress.

4. Social Justice Fundamentalism (SJF) has emerged as a powerful ideological force

Social Justice Fundamentalism (SJF) is a philosophical Frankenstein. It's the Marxist framework, applied to American social justice, merged with the postmodern rejection of modernity, while swapping out postmodern skepticism toward all metanarratives with a total embrace of the SJF metanarrative.

Origins and beliefs. SJF combines elements from various philosophical traditions:

• Critical Theory and neo-Marxism
• Postmodernism
• Identity politics

Key tenets of SJF include:

• All disparities between groups are due to oppression
• Western society is fundamentally racist/sexist/oppressive
• Lived experience trumps objective evidence
• Language and discourse perpetuate oppression

Contrast with Liberal Social Justice. Urban distinguishes SJF from more traditional liberal approaches to social justice:

• LSJ: Works within existing systems, values free speech and open debate
• SJF: Seeks to dismantle existing systems, often suppresses dissenting views

Understanding this distinction is crucial for navigating contemporary social and political discourse.

5. Cancel culture and idea supremacy threaten open discourse in various institutions

When a liberal institution is conquered by a golem, we should all take notice and ask why.

Institutional capture. Urban provides numerous examples of how SJF ideology has gained influence in key institutions:

• Universities
• Media organizations
• Tech companies
• Professional associations

This influence often manifests through:

• Disinvitation of speakers
• Retractions of published work
• Firing of employees for expressing "problematic" views
• Self-censorship due to fear of backlash

Chilling effects. The threat of cancellation or professional consequences leads to:

• Reduced willingness to express diverse viewpoints
• Narrowing of acceptable discourse
• Hindered scientific inquiry and artistic expression

Preserving open dialogue and protecting dissenting voices is crucial for maintaining the health of liberal institutions and society at large.

6. The digital age has amplified tribalism and enabled new forms of social control

The digital cudgel created new harms and new injustices.

Social media dynamics. The rise of social media has transformed public discourse:

• Algorithms promote engaging (often polarizing) content
• Outrage and tribalism are rewarded with likes and shares
• Mob mentality can quickly form around perceived transgressions

The digital cudgel. Urban introduces this concept to describe how online mobs can wield significant power:

• Rapid spread of information (or misinformation)
• Ability to pressure institutions and individuals
• Creation of a culture of fear around expressing certain views

Unintended consequences. While social media initially promised to democratize discourse, it has often had the opposite effect:

• Amplification of extreme voices
• Erosion of nuance in complex discussions
• Increased polarization and tribalism

Navigating this new landscape requires developing digital literacy and fostering healthier online communities.

7. Defending liberal values requires actively resisting illiberal tendencies

This is how a smear, even when applied to a genuine asshole, can spider out into a web that ends up punishing non-assholes and hindering productive discussion.

Vigilance is key. Maintaining a liberal society requires constant effort to uphold its core values:

• Free speech and open debate
• Due process and presumption of innocence
• Equality under the law
• Respect for individual rights

Resisting authoritarianism. Urban argues that both the political left and right can exhibit authoritarian tendencies that must be resisted:

• Censorship of unpopular views
• Mob justice and cancel culture
• Erosion of democratic norms

Cultivating higher-rung thinking. To combat these trends, individuals and institutions should strive to:

• Engage with diverse viewpoints
• Be willing to change minds based on evidence
• Promote intellectual humility and curiosity
• Create and protect spaces for open dialogue

By actively working to maintain these values, we can help ensure that our societies remain genuinely liberal and resist the pull towards illiberalism and tribalism.

Last updated: December 20, 2024