In a recent edition of The Ethicist, a letter to the editor style publication from the New York Times, Kwame Anthony Appiah responds beautifully to a difficult question a reader asked about whether they should cut off an acquaintance who has committed racist acts.

Like you, I favor a bit of grace in a world full of sinners. And cutting off everyone who is morally flawed would leave you with a very small coterie of friends — who might then be tempted by the flaw of moral vanity. (In which case you’d have to get rid of them, too.)

You say you’re an equality-minded liberal. The way to live your creed isn’t by curating a spotless feed of spotless minds but by helping people do better. Hew to the norm; judge the person by what he does next; show grace where it stands a chance to help someone grow. That’s the difference between moral vanity and moral work.

This dovetails nicely with my last post, Counterproductive activism. I would never defend racist acts, obviously, but I agree that moral work demands helping others to be better, if at all possible. The rest, as he says, is moral vanity. Gosh, what a great term.

By the way, helping others to be better means approaching their wrongdoings with kindness, curiosity, compassion, understanding, and forgiveness. It's a slow and painful process, but that's how change happens. This approach is needed even when others cause severe harm. In fact, it's needed especially when others cause extreme harm. Just ask Megan Phelps-Roper, who left the incomparably hateful Westboro Baptist Church only after others had the idea to challenge her with patience and curiosity. Telling someone off in the form of “advice,” when you know the message won't be heard, because it makes you feel better about yourself? That's not moral work, in my opinion. That's moral vanity.

Am I guilty of moral vanity? Yep, in ways I both do and don't notice. Even this post might convey a kind of moral vanity. If you notice times when I'm guilty of it, though, let's talk about it.

#Communication #PersonalDevelopment #Philosophy #Politics #SocialMedia #Technology

I want to help create a better world. That involves persuading people to see things differently—to care more about animal suffering, for example—but I also need to be sure I'm not pushing people away.

Little does more harm to a cause than the perception that its adherents are crazy. I've never heard anyone say, “Gosh, vegans are nuts… I should be one of them!” Purity tests are similarly destructive. Want to make an enemy out of a potential ally? Chastise them for not being good enough. On the contrary, celebrating small steps in the right direction achieves so much more than demanding perfection. (Guess who else isn't perfect. I'll give you a hint: you can find them in your mirror. Mine, too.)

Protesting outside KFC and throwing red paint on fur coats probably increases animal suffering, on balance, by deepening the resistance and habits of those who oppose ethical veganism. Similarly, having a meltdown when someone disagrees with one's economic vision probably hinders the economic justice they're after.

For this reason, I'm so frustrated and disappointed that social media fosters extremism and encourages users to preach to the choir. It's worse than a massive opportunity cost. It actually leads us to harm those we are trying to help.

#Belief #Communication #PersonalDevelopment #Philosophy #Politics #Technology

“Politics is not supposed to be a team sport.” —Unknown

#Politics #Philosophy

What if we made all advertising illegal?

[…]

The financial incentives to create addictive digital content would instantly disappear, and so would the mechanisms that allow both commercial and political actors to create personalized, reality-distorting bubbles.

Clickbait, listicles, and affiliate marketing schemes would become worthless overnight. Algorithm-driven platforms like Instagram and TikTok that harvest and monetize attention, destroying youth, would lose their economic foundation.

[…]

Removing these advanced manipulation tools would force everyone—politicians included—to snap back into reality. By outlawing advertising, the machinery of mass delusion would lose its most addictive and toxic fuel.

—Kōdō Simone in What If We Made Advertising Illegal?

#SocialMedia #Technology #Communication #Politics #Philosophy

Mark Zuckerberg is a villain.

Again, this is not simply partisan. He was a villain ten years ago, and he's a villain today.

Yes, he's been philanthropic, and he's pledged to donate 99% of his Facebook shares to charity. That is genuinely amazing, and it deserves genuine praise. To be sure, it's a hell of a lot more money than I'll ever donate to charity. Still, what does it matter if he destroys the world in the process? Will his philanthropy even begin to clean up the mess he's created? Surely not. He's done far more than $200 billion worth of harm to society. Try putting a dollar amount on political extremism, a problem his company has massively exacerbated.

Mark Zuckerberg is a villain, and like all villains, he thinks he's doing good for the world. He's not.

#Business #Philosophy #Politics #SocialMedia #Technology

“I do not like that man. I must get to know him better.”

—Unknown (often dubiously attributed to Abraham Lincoln)

#Politics #Philosophy

What's wrong with hyperpartisan media? (Pick your favorite example of a one-sided TV channel, YouTube channel, website, radio show, podcast, or magazine.) If the problem is that these outlets promote overly simplistic, slanted perspectives, never reporting the other side of the story, then why are we not equally worried about social media filter bubbles, given that they are designed to do the same thing?

Facebook and other social media platforms show us what we want to see. They reinforce our existing worldviews. One doesn’t need to think hard to understand why; anything else would be bad for business. Nobody logs on to be told they’re wrong. Nobody enjoys having their reality challenged.

I’m concerned about old-style hyperpartisan media, but this new, “social” version is much worse. Many of us walk around with personalized, digital propagandists close by. They push our buttons and beg for our limited attention—buzz, buzz! Sometimes, we spend more time with them than with real human beings, with their nuanced and thoughtful perspectives.

Should we be surprised the world is so divided?

#Belief #Business #Communication #Favorites #Politics #SocialMedia #Technology

In the past, I wrote that we may need a digital equivalent to the awkward pause. At the time, I couldn't find the blog post where I first encountered that idea, but now, almost exactly one year later, I've found it. It really stood the test of time. I couldn't agree more!

Imagine you're at a dinner party, and you're getting into a heated argument. As you start yelling, the other people quickly hush their voices and start glaring at you. None of the onlookers have to take further action—it's clear from their facial expressions that you're being a jerk.

In digital conversations, giving feedback requires more conscious effort. Silence is the default. Participants only get feedback from people who join the fray. They receive no signal about how the silent onlookers perceive their dialogue. In fact, they don't receive much signal that onlookers observed the conversation at all.

As a result, the feedback you do receive in digital conversations is more polarized, because the only people who will engage are those who are willing to take that extra step and bear that cost of wading into a messy conversation.

—Devon Zuegel in The silence is deafening

#Belief #Communication #Politics #SocialMedia #Technology #Wellbeing

Politics has become a means of self-realization rather than a tool for solving practical problems. Views on enlightenment differ, of course, causing intense conflict and distrust. To restore our trust in each other and the political process, now may be a good time to focus on common-sense legislation with broad appeal. Let's eliminate daylight saving time, outlaw deceptive resort fees, and begin to regulate social media. Let's stop tech support scammers, strengthen online privacy, and standardize on one charging connector for electric cars. Let's make browser vendors work together to prevent identity theft. These things may seem inconsequential, but getting along couldn't be more important. Along the way, we might discover that politics doesn't always have to be so acrimonious.

#Belief #Business #Communication #Favorites #Philosophy #Politics #SocialMedia #SoftwareDevelopment #Technology #UserExperience #Wellbeing

An occasional reminder may be prudent: I'm not the John Karahalis who writes letters to the editor of the New York Daily News. I'm not taking a position on those opinions. I just don't find it productive to discuss religion or politics in polite company.

For the most part, I regret discussing religion and politics on social media. Doing so accomplished little good. Moreover, the ubiquity of such content is one of the many reasons I find social media intolerable. Of course, religion and politics take many forms. The line between them is becoming less distinct, and often, they disguise themselves as simple reality.

#Belief #Communication #Politics #PublicNotice