The problem with orthodox opinion is not that it bans contradiction, it’s that it makes people uncomfortable saying anything other than whatever the orthodoxy has designated as the most important thing to say today.
Let us now read the catechism aloud in unison
More obviously I’m subtweeting political twitter, which encourages contradicting the Bad Tribe, but only concerning Trending Topics.
Less obviously, I’m subtweeting Buddhist twitter, which is terrified to say anything that might not be sufficiently holy.
Western Buddhists’ dysfunctional relationship with authority combines rejection of respect for mere humans who have great depth of understanding, with pathetic deference to absurd and obsolete doctrines.
The former are “no better than anyone else,” the latter “ancient wisdom.”
Deference to Asian Buddhist teachers, sometimes still present, is based on their genetic ethnic superiority when it comes to holiness, not any realistic assessment of their teaching ability (which is often negligible).
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
When white people rant about how racist and awful all white people are, maybe they mean something by “white supremacy” other than the official definition.
Some anti-racism is not about race... what actual experience of white people does it express?
Spending time in many different countries and cultures lets you see how sex and gender work differently. America is more rigorously egalitarian than almost all, yet many women feel they live in a rigidly oppressive patriarchy.
Returning to the US after months away, I’m immediately struck by how uncomfortable American gender relations are. We’re doing *something* exceptionally wrong.
Calling that “patriarchy” is misleading if taken literally, but it expresses real pervasive legitimate revulsion.
I first noticed this with “capitalism,” which means something quite different—more local and personal and concrete—for anti-capitalists than for economists.
Roughly, “I hate my job and my boss, there’s not enough money, same for everyone I know.”
It’s a huge problem that everyone hates their job and their boss, and most *don’t* pay enough. Those in power are entirely failing to take that seriously, which makes most people rightly angry.
Blaming “capitalism” is technically wrong, but most people know what you mean.
“Destroying capitalism” would make everything catastrophically worse if “capitalism” means what economists mean by it.
But the current pattern of economic stagnation plus housing cost inflation plus increasing income inequality does need creative destruction.
Save this link in case of emergencies (you or someone you know is having trouble with meditation that affects your ability to function normally for more than a little while after stopping meditation): cheetahhouse.org/get-help-intro
Being a sciency kinda guy, I'd like quantitative evidence.
Much of the academic and clinical work on negative effects of meditation has been done by Willoughby Britton and her colleagues. See her site for details! vivo.brown.edu/display/wbritt…
I was misleading and probably caused harm by being polite and indirect instead of saying “this popular thing looks bad to me” explicitly. I regret this and intend to be less polite in future. But the opposite error is also harmful…
Many turn to meditation as a less grueling, less expensive, more popular alternative to psychotherapy or psychedelics. And in small doses it's usually beneficial.
What no one tells you is that the mainstream meditation methods were explicitly designed to turn you into a zombie. That's what their inventors said they wanted. And if you practice them seriously, that's what happens.
@slatestarcodex .@glenweyl’s “Why I Am Not A Technocrat” is also very good and worth reading if you haven’t already.
I think there is much less disagreement here than it may seem. Both essays are quite complicated, so sorting this out point-by-point would be difficult, but…
@slatestarcodex@glenweyl Both essays take what I would call a meta-systematic, meta-rational position (which is why I admire both of them). They seem to agree on a core understanding (one that is, I think, very important and NOT widely recognized):