If one wants to return to an issue in a conversation, one can simply say, “I’d like to return to subject xyz…” and then proceed to restate and elaborate the original subject. There’s no need to label the other person’s imputed intentions. And if that person keeps changing the subject, mention that and ask them why.
So, “emphasizing the absurdity and inequity of singling out a person to rake over the coals” for a common behavior is justified whataboutism? Basically, that’s the defense of pointing out double-standards and hypocrisy, which is usually condemned as just plain ole whataboutism
The term "whataboutism" first appeared in print in 1978, but wasn’t much used until 2007-2008, when British journalist Edward Lucas popularized the term in The Economist. The use of whataboutism in American political discourse increased sharply around the 2016 US presidential election…
The whys and what-fors of whataboutism accusations are the two sides of speech motivation: belief and purpose. Behind every utterance is a felt-truth - which may or may not be conscious or expressed - but the reason we actually say something is to achieve a goal. So what felt-truths are behind accusations of whataboutism, and what do the accusers hope to accomplish?
The accusation of whataboutism often stings, because it implies a moral deficiency in the accused. It’s less about logic and evidence than the accuser’s moral convictions.
But how do we know another’s intent? What appears to be an attempt to change the subject may actually be an attempt to improve the quality of a discussion, to add proper context or examine the speaker’s assumptions. Besides, what’s wrong with trying to redirect attention (“distract”) from a topic if one takes issue with how a claim is presented or defended and wants to sort that out first? And what’s wrong with pointing out double standards or hypocrisy?
So people go along to get along and cultures ossify. But every once in a while, alternative perspectives break through and the whole thing crumples, sometimes very quickly. That may be happening now, in America.
There are a few differences though: corporate statements about company culture or core values don’t mention devotion or commitment to the organization itself and they have little to say about individual fulfillment. They’re more about working together on a mission, e.g., customer satisfaction, better products, fixing problems. Patriotism is also about working together towards common goals (e.g., the “American Project”) but love of country (the overarching organization) is central. And in the U.S., love of country is bound up with its gift to the individual: liberty, opportunity, and the pursuit of happiness.
Information: “Any communication or representation of knowledge such as facts, data or opinions in any medium or form”. National Institute of Standards and Technology
Human behavior is the outcome of multicausal pathways. For example, in the theory of planned behavior, beliefs, intentions and perceived behavioral control are all parts of a causal chain that lead to a behavior, whether it’s cramming for an exam or stealing a car. The outcomes of behavior provide information relevant to beliefs, intentions and perceived behavioral control and so are part of the causal chain. Intervening at any point in the chain may change the behavior.
A root cause is not fixed: its effects are not fixed. What gets the ball rolling may not keep it going. What keeps it going may change. What keeps the ball rolling may lose potency with repetition, or be worn down by contrary forces. In other words, causal pathways are subject to decay.
Gray and Pruitt maintain that perception of harm is central to all moral judgments. Or as they put it, “harmless wrongs do not exist”. They also argue that “moral disagreement across politics is in part grounded in different assumptions of vulnerability”. For example…
Per the above chart, American 15-year olds have been reading at roughly the same level (on average) as they were 20 years ago. Surprisingly, their reading performance held up rather well during the pandemic years, despite the challenges of extended school closures, remote learning and the high absenteeism.
Facts are nice, but fact-checking is not always relevant or helpful, especially when it misses the point of whatever statements are being corrected.
This post was going to compare police response times (RTs) in the ten most dangerous US cities with the RTs of the safest cities (link). Unfortunately, none of the dangerous cities had decent RT data, except for Oakland, California. But we’re in luck! Oakland has great data, not only for RTs but also for police staffing levels, both across several years.
Around this time, journalists, social scientists, and even philosophers provided helpful lists of expressions associated with gaslighting to help individuals and groups recognize when they’ve been victims. For example….
“Sense of agency refers to the feeling of control over actions and their consequences.” - James W Moore, What Is the Sense of Agency and Why Does it Matter?
Power makes it easier to get what you want. Power gets you even more of what you want. Power gets you things you didn’t know you wanted. Power opens up a world of expanding possibility.
Nibbling at the edge of a mystery, trying to reach the core of some truth. I can taste what seems like progress but can’t see the fruit, so have no idea how much longer it will take.
My distinction between insider and outsider perspectives comes from 20th century anthropology, which used the terms emic and etic to make the same distinction…What I’ve learned from reading about patriotism in America is that emic and etic descriptions tend to be worlds apart.