Polite, impolite—it’s all sneering. If I tell someone their post sucks, it doesn’t matter whether I say it in so many words, or I use my manners and dress it up. I’m attempting to socially exclude them at the meta-level, rather than engaging with the post at the object level. (Different are the cases where someone actually breaks down at an object level what’s wrong with someone’s post, which I would not count as sneering!)
It’s hard to have an object-level disagreement with you here without any in-context examples, but I’ll say I’m very certain this sort of thing happens constantly on LessWrong, as everywhere. I don’t think I’m just some oversensitive lunatic reading emotional overtones that aren’t there. In general, the idea people are blind to social games is a lot more believable to me than that people are seeing them where they don’t exist, since most social games happen unconsciously and ego-dystonically. I’m sure you don’t believe you play such games, and I’m sure you’re wrong. (Your use of italics betrays you!)
No, it isn’t. It is possible to disagree with people on the object level. I realize that there exist people who cannot descend below simulacrum level three, but the world is not filled with them.
I acknowledge the possibility of having disagreements on the object level, I’m just trying to put forward the idea that sometimes higher-level disagreements are actually valuable, and that a community that only has object-level discussions would be overrun by bullshitters.
Sure. Goodness knows we don’t need to redebate creationism every time. But softening your phrasing isn’t sneering. It’s acting to make your words less upsetting and more pleasant to hear. That is very nearly the opposite of sneering. (It also, in cases where you insert qualifiers, has the valuable effect of making you look more reasonable should you happen to be wrong.)
Sorry, maybe we are miscommunicating; I don’t think the act of softening your speech itself is sneering. Rather, I think you can appear to speak fairly politely and still be sneering. Subtle sneering, which is common on sites like LessWrong where unsubtle sneering is taboo.
As for inserting qualifiers: he who excuses himself accuses himself.
Polite, impolite—it’s all sneering. If I tell someone their post sucks, it doesn’t matter whether I say it in so many words, or I use my manners and dress it up. I’m attempting to socially exclude them at the meta-level, rather than engaging with the post at the object level. (Different are the cases where someone actually breaks down at an object level what’s wrong with someone’s post, which I would not count as sneering!)
It’s hard to have an object-level disagreement with you here without any in-context examples, but I’ll say I’m very certain this sort of thing happens constantly on LessWrong, as everywhere. I don’t think I’m just some oversensitive lunatic reading emotional overtones that aren’t there. In general, the idea people are blind to social games is a lot more believable to me than that people are seeing them where they don’t exist, since most social games happen unconsciously and ego-dystonically. I’m sure you don’t believe you play such games, and I’m sure you’re wrong. (Your use of italics betrays you!)
No, it isn’t. It is possible to disagree with people on the object level. I realize that there exist people who cannot descend below simulacrum level three, but the world is not filled with them.
I acknowledge the possibility of having disagreements on the object level, I’m just trying to put forward the idea that sometimes higher-level disagreements are actually valuable, and that a community that only has object-level discussions would be overrun by bullshitters.
Sure. Goodness knows we don’t need to redebate creationism every time. But softening your phrasing isn’t sneering. It’s acting to make your words less upsetting and more pleasant to hear. That is very nearly the opposite of sneering. (It also, in cases where you insert qualifiers, has the valuable effect of making you look more reasonable should you happen to be wrong.)
Sorry, maybe we are miscommunicating; I don’t think the act of softening your speech itself is sneering. Rather, I think you can appear to speak fairly politely and still be sneering. Subtle sneering, which is common on sites like LessWrong where unsubtle sneering is taboo.
As for inserting qualifiers: he who excuses himself accuses himself.