[HN Gopher] Thought-Terminating Cliche
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Thought-Terminating Cliche
        
       Author : Tomte
       Score  : 32 points
       Date   : 2023-07-08 19:56 UTC (3 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (en.wikipedia.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (en.wikipedia.org)
        
       | beaned wrote:
       | Some of these just seem like things people say when they don't
       | want to dig in to a conversation for convenience, or don't have
       | an interesting reply. The article sort of lays them out as having
       | a type of sideways intention, but often these ones are more
       | benign. I think there are probably better examples.
        
       | wayeq wrote:
       | "Well, I don't know about all that."
        
       | jawns wrote:
       | > An example of the cliche in use provided by Chaz Bufe is "the
       | admonition given to Catholic schoolchildren to recite the Hail
       | Mary or rosary to ward off 'impure thoughts'. The use of
       | repetitive chanting by the Hare Krishnas serves the same thought-
       | stopping purpose."
       | 
       | Neither of these examples have much relevance to thought-
       | terminating cliches, whose purpose is to "stop an argument from
       | proceeding further," because neither of these examples involves
       | an argument.
       | 
       | Rather, they both have a meditative purpose, intended not to end
       | thought but to focus it on something. In the case of Catholics
       | reciting the rosary, the intention is to focus their thoughts on
       | the mysteries of their faith. In the case of Hare Krishnas
       | chanting the maha-mantra, it is intended to achieve self-
       | realization by connecting with Krishna.
       | 
       | But whatever. I'm entitled to my opinion, so let's just agree to
       | disagree.
        
         | _Microft wrote:
         | > let's just agree to disagree
         | 
         | That's one, I'd say.
        
           | vacuity wrote:
           | In this case, parent laid out their thoughts already and
           | didn't make it a "I'm going to pit my value/belief against
           | yours and not bother to elaborate because I'm right"
           | situation, which is where I find something like "let's agree
           | to disagree" banal. I think it can make sense if one expounds
           | on one's value and leaves off with that phrase because
           | there's a legitimate impasse (which may entail more
           | discussion to discover). Parent was more making an
           | observation of the examples not fitting the definition, so
           | there's not really a value judgement.
        
           | AnimalMuppet wrote:
           | That's interesting. "Agree to disagree" means "you aren't
           | going to persuade me, I'm not going to persuade you,
           | conversation over." That's one kind of debate-ending cliche.
           | 
           | There are others that are "you're wrong, conversation over".
           | Calling someone or something "X-ist" is often that.
           | 
           | I guess both of those can serve as thought-ending cliches,
           | because now I don't have to think any further about what you
           | say. But in terms of what they do to the _conversation_ ,
           | they are not equivalent.
        
       | carrozo wrote:
       | At the end of the day, it is what it is, and it ain't what it
       | ain't.
        
       | mandmandam wrote:
       | It is what it is.
       | 
       | That's life.
       | 
       | Don't overthink it.
       | 
       | ... Seems to me that these cliches grew rapidly in the last
       | couple decades.
       | 
       | The fact that people just accept without challenge that Threads
       | will de-platform anything "political" [0] is an outcome of this
       | kind of thinking, imo. People would have been a lot more cynical
       | about such a move ( _from Mark "they trust me - dumb fucks"
       | Zuckerberg_) fifteen years ago.
       | 
       | 0 - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36636486
        
         | pphysch wrote:
         | More examples: "whataboutism", "you sound like <bad guy>",
         | "this is <bad thing> propaganda"
         | 
         | It's definitely gotten worse in recent decades. Oratory and
         | intellectual debate are increasingly rare in our society since
         | the Cold War. Political bipolarity eviscerated the
         | American/Western intellect.
        
           | mandmandam wrote:
           | Indeed - there seems to be a concerted attack on nuance, and
           | even thinking.
           | 
           | Great people like Stallman, Tesla, Feynman, Chomsky, Assange
           | and Snowden, etc, are smeared and dismissed due to unrelated,
           | out of context, twisted, false selections of views.
           | 
           | Tribalism is fed and magnified, saying the 'wrong' (no matter
           | if true) thing gets you dismissed as a conspiracy theorist /
           | tankie / Trumpist / how many other "thought-ending insults".
           | No questions, no time for looking at evidence, just thrown in
           | the 'other' bucket.
           | 
           | Biden asked Twitter to censor true information that went
           | against the preferred narrative, and the so-called left wing
           | collectively decided "there's no there there", it's a
           | "nothing-burger". More cliches. And the 'other' sides
           | thought-ending cliches are so barmy that it's impolite to
           | even describe them accurately; and it physically hurts to
           | even try.
           | 
           | And it does go back to that "bipolarity", which acts very
           | like a monopole on certain big issues like oil, war,
           | equality, censorship, and people not in the tribe.
           | 
           | I don't think we can blame it all on social media or human
           | nature either. In too many cases, you can point to someone
           | shadowy putting their finger on the levers of power. Murdoch,
           | Turner, Zuck, etc; they all have a lot more in common with
           | each other than with us.
        
             | robocat wrote:
             | > And it does go back to that "bipolarity"
             | 
             | It happens in New Zealand too, and we don't have bipartisan
             | politics
        
               | Given_47 wrote:
               | Interesting. So I'd imagine it's less predetermined but
               | people still end up taking a certain side and from there
               | all the same toxicity appears
        
               | mandmandam wrote:
               | That is a very fair point - this is quite possibly an
               | issue right across "the West" (which can include NZ in
               | this case). I've noticed it in Ireland, in France, in
               | Germany. Even the Scandos seem not to be immune.
               | 
               | I'll have to think about it some more. I will say this
               | though - America is at the vanguard of anti-
               | intellectualism, and has been for quite some time. Mark
               | Twain commented on it _frequently_ , for example.
               | 
               | And even so, the last couple decades have seen the
               | dismissal of deep / nuanced thinking grow far worse, even
               | as "bipartisanship" also rapidly got bad enough to bring
               | us a lot closer to civil war than I expected in the 90s.
               | 
               | One last point - it's _weird_ that this would happen even
               | as everyone gets _nerdier_. People all use computers,
               | watch LOTR and Harry Potter, cosplaying and conventions
               | are all normalized... It 's not what I'd have expected.
        
               | pphysch wrote:
               | Polarization is everywhere (in AUS/NZ mainly due to being
               | part of Anglosphere yet proximal to China), but in
               | America it is on a totally different level than NZ.
               | 
               | I occasionally will see nuanced, heterodox comments from
               | AUS/NZ politicians that would not be tolerated in
               | Washington.
        
             | Given_47 wrote:
             | Good points I actively avoid allergies nearly all political
             | discourse (especially online) for the reasons u stated.
             | Unless ur also masochistic, any normal person would be
             | driven insane at the sheer absurdity of it all ("normal"
             | being us abnormal people that find nuanced and good faith
             | discussions constructive lol)
        
       | renewiltord wrote:
       | I think on HN that would be "this is not Reddit" or like any
       | other forum "correlation isn't causation".
        
         | robocat wrote:
         | That is selection bias.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-07-08 23:02 UTC)