Cognitive Illiberalism and the Speech-Conduct Distinction

Before making moral evaluations, it's really useful to look at these situations, and try to automatically reverse the "polarity" of the actors involved. If you see people doing something and you think they're on your side, imagine a similar scenario in which people are taking the same actions for a cause you are violently opposed to, or on behalf of a group you find deplorable. And vice versa. This helps reduce the chances you'll get confused and take a hypocritical position.

&gt; Subjects of opposing cultural outlooks who were assigned to the same experimental condition (and thus had the same belief about the nature of the protest) disagreed sharply on key “facts” — including whether the protestors obstructed and threatened pedestrians.<p>That&#x27;s scary, but it&#x27;s potentially really helpful in understanding the connections between language and belief.<p>I know there&#x27;s some controversy about the validity of the so-called Sapir–Whorf hypothesis, but the idea that language and perception affect political culture was well understood by George Orwell, and I&#x27;m not surprised if the idea intersects well with the &quot;ultimate attribution error&quot; phenomenon from social psychology.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Ultimate_attribution_error" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Ultimate_attribution_error</a>

This is why it&#x27;s so important to deliberately escape any filter bubbles (<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Filter_bubble" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Filter_bubble</a>) you may be in. Pre-2015 reddit&#x27;s r&#x2F;all was a reasonable, if lazy way to do this. After their free speech bait &amp; switch it became mostly useless for anything but entertainment and establishment&#x2F;Democrat propaganda.<p>Here&#x27;s a subset of my &quot;daily&quot; bookmark folder that at least attempts to do this for me when combined with honestly too heavy reddit&#x2F;facebook usage:<p>* <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;</a><p>* <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;poal.co&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;poal.co&#x2F;</a><p>* <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;slashdot.org&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;slashdot.org&#x2F;</a><p>* <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.allsides.com&#x2F;unbiased-balanced-news" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.allsides.com&#x2F;unbiased-balanced-news</a><p>* <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;gab.com&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;gab.com&#x2F;</a><p>* <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.unz.com&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.unz.com&#x2F;</a><p>* <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;gettr.com&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;gettr.com&#x2F;</a><p>Are some of them controversial? Of course, but that&#x27;s the point. The wildly authoritarian left leaning sites that comprise big tech as a whole represent a single filter bubble. Staying in any particular bubble (right wing ones exist too) is a great way to turn yourself into a useful idiot&#x2F;cultists&#x2F;NPC.<p>Because the difficulty of tuning into a site that only leans in one direction isn&#x27;t that you&#x27;ll get biased news coverage, but whole entire stories are completely left out if they&#x27;re bad for that side, and stories that are eventually found to be wildly incorrect, or even completely false issue only the quietest of correction edits while the untrue memes repeat ad infinite, but sites that lean the other way will ruthlessly correct their opponents.<p>The most important things to be reading are the things that are never talked about in your bias-confirming sources of infotainment.<p>tl;dr: filter bubbles bad, they&#x27;ll turn you into a cultist