Wokeism is dead - Lex Fridman

[whh2222]

They/Them always tripped me up. I naturally refer to they them as plural. 

[Joshe]

@Rafael Thundercat That looks like a good book. You should have Claude write it. Reflexive contrarianism is a great term.

ChatGPT:

Reflexive contrarianism is the tendency to oppose or reject popular or mainstream views, ideas, or norms automatically and without critical evaluation, simply because they are widely accepted. This behavior is often driven by a desire to appear independent, intellectual, or unconventional, rather than by genuine disagreement or reasoned analysis.

Characteristics of Reflexive Contrarianism

Automatic Opposition: A reflexive contrarian tends to dismiss mainstream opinions as wrong or uninformed, often without investigating the evidence or arguments that support those views.

Superficial Rebellion: While it can seem like deep critical thinking, reflexive contrarianism is often reactionary and lacks substantive reasoning. It values being different over being correct.

Signal of Identity: Being contrarian can serve as a way for individuals to distinguish themselves, signal intellectual independence, or feel superior to the "herd."

Cynicism: It often includes a mistrust of authority, institutions, or consensus, assuming these are inherently flawed or corrupt.

Overestimation of Own Insight: Reflexive contrarians may believe their perspective is unique or revolutionary, even when it stems from a knee-jerk rejection rather than a well-thought-out stance.

Examples

• Rejecting scientific consensus (e.g., climate change or vaccinations) not because of specific evidence but because it's a mainstream belief.
• Insisting that a critically acclaimed movie or book is "overrated" without engaging with the work itself.
• Opposing a popular political policy or social trend simply because it is widely supported, without considering its merits.

Dangers of Reflexive Contrarianism

• Stifles Growth: Rejecting mainstream ideas without examination can lead to intellectual stagnation, as valuable insights may be dismissed out of hand.
• Undermines Credibility: Constant opposition without clear reasoning can make others view the contrarian as untrustworthy or overly cynical.
• Polarization: Reflexive contrarianism contributes to echo chambers by rejecting consensus and embracing fringe ideas, potentially fostering extremism.

How to Avoid Reflexive Contrarianism

• Engage Critically: Evaluate ideas on their own merits, regardless of whether they align with popular opinion.
• Be Open-Minded: Accept that mainstream views can sometimes be correct and that consensus often arises from rigorous testing and evidence.
• Separate Ego from Beliefs: Avoid defining your identity by opposition; focus on truth-seeking rather than distinguishing yourself.
• Practice Humility: Acknowledge that being contrarian doesn't automatically make an idea valuable or insightful.

While questioning consensus is an important part of critical thinking, reflexive contrarianism undermines genuine inquiry by prioritizing dissent over understanding. True critical thinkers question ideas, mainstream or not, based on evidence and reasoned analysis.

[Joshe]

What personality traits or psychological tendencies tend to cluster with reflexive contrarianism?

## Personality Traits and Psychological Tendencies Associated with Reflexive Contrarianism

Reflexive contrarianism often clusters with certain personality traits and psychological tendencies that drive individuals to consistently oppose mainstream ideas. These traits may not guarantee reflexive contrarianism but are commonly associated with it.

---

### **1. Openness to Experience**
- **High Openness**: People high in openness often enjoy exploring unconventional ideas and questioning norms. This can predispose them to contrarian thinking, though in reflexive contrarianism, this trait may manifest as an uncritical embrace of anything non-mainstream.
- **Desire for Novelty**: A craving for unique or unconventional perspectives can lead to rejecting mainstream ideas simply because they are familiar or "common."

---

### **2. Need for Uniqueness**
- **Individualism**: Reflexive contrarians may have a strong desire to stand out and be perceived as unique or different.
- **Identity Building**: Contrarian views can become a way to construct or signal a distinct identity, often at the expense of open-mindedness.

---

### **3. Distrust of Authority**
- **Skepticism or Cynicism**: A deep-seated mistrust of authority figures, institutions, or consensus can drive contrarianism. This tendency often assumes that the majority is wrong, incompetent, or corrupt.
- **Conspiratorial Thinking**: This overlaps with contrarianism when individuals are predisposed to seeing hidden motives or agendas in widely accepted ideas.

---

### **4. Intellectual Overconfidence**
- **Dunning-Kruger Effect**: Contrarians may overestimate their understanding of complex topics, leading to a belief that their dissenting opinion is more valid than expert consensus.
- **Overemphasis on Intuition**: They might rely heavily on "gut feelings" or personal reasoning while dismissing evidence and data from experts.

---

### **5. Rebelliousness**
- **Oppositional Defiance**: A tendency to resist being told what to think or do, sometimes stemming from a desire to assert independence or autonomy.
- **Anti-Conformity**: A belief that going against the grain is inherently virtuous or courageous, often irrespective of the content of the mainstream view.

---

### **6. Low Agreeableness**
- **Argumentative Nature**: Reflexive contrarians may enjoy debating or playing "devil's advocate," not necessarily to uncover truth but to challenge others or create friction.
- **Low Empathy**: This can manifest as a lack of concern for how their constant opposition may affect social harmony or relationships.

---

### **7. Sensation Seeking**
- **Provocation**: Contrarians often enjoy the thrill of shocking or provoking others by espousing unpopular opinions.
- **Drama Seeking**: Contrarianism can also be fueled by a desire to create or participate in conflict and debate, as it provides stimulation and attention.

---

### **8. Rigidity or Black-and-White Thinking**
- **Dogmatism**: Paradoxically, contrarians who pride themselves on rejecting mainstream ideas may become dogmatic in their alternative views.
- **Binary Thinking**: The tendency to see mainstream ideas as inherently wrong and opposing views as inherently right.

---

### **9. Narcissistic Traits**
- **Self-Perceived Intellectual Superiority**: Reflexive contrarians may believe their dissent makes them smarter or more insightful than the average person.
- **Need for Validation**: They may seek attention or admiration by positioning themselves as the "voice of reason" in opposition to the majority.

---

### **10. Fear of Mediocrity**
- **Insecurity**: Reflexive contrarians may reject mainstream ideas out of fear that agreeing with the majority makes them "average" or ordinary.
- **Perfectionism**: They might believe that mainstream solutions are inadequate and only their unique perspective is "good enough."

---

### **11. Social or Emotional Alienation**
- **Feeling of Outsider Status**: Reflexive contrarians may feel disconnected from or misunderstood by mainstream society, leading them to reject its ideas reflexively.
- **Defensive Posture**: Contrarianism can serve as a shield against perceived judgment, allowing the person to position themselves as superior or misunderstood.

---

### **12. Low Tolerance for Ambiguity**
- **Desire for Simplicity**: Contrarianism can be a way to impose order by categorizing mainstream ideas as "bad" and alternative views as "good."
- **Certainty-Seeking**: They may prefer clear stances, rejecting nuance or complexity in favor of opposing the majority.

---

### **13. Emotional Reactivity**
- **Reactance**: A strong emotional reaction to perceived restrictions on freedom or autonomy, leading to rejection of consensus views.
- **Defensiveness**: Criticism of their contrarian views may reinforce their opposition, creating a feedback loop of defensiveness and rejection.

---

### Conclusion
While reflexive contrarianism can emerge from intellectual curiosity or genuine skepticism, when combined with the above traits, it becomes less about critical thinking and more about identity, emotion, and reaction. Understanding these tendencies can help in fostering balanced, thoughtful skepticism rather than uncritical opposition.

[Emerald]

@Joshe This strongly described me back in my teen years. 

I held a really strong contrarian way of being because self-differentiation had been one of my more effective strategies to (on the positive side) embrace my weirdness and cope with feelings of alienation. As a child, I really felt like an alien trying to figure out how to pass as a human... and constantly failing at it and being ridiculed for failing at it.

And embracing my differences and leaning into them heavily was the only thing that ended up working. And as a teenager, I really found my place with people who appreciated my weirdness. So, I started feeling like extraordinariness and divergence was an unquestioned good. And there was a strong judgment towards those who are mainstream... because it was more comfortable to feel like I was rejecting the mainstream... instead of the mainstream rejecting me.

And what arose from this was a very strong fear of being ordinary and blending in with the crowd, which manifested in increased fears of aging and becoming more average. And when I felt average, averageness didn't feel like I was enough. It reminded me of trying to conform to normalcy as a child and failing. 

Then, in my 20s, I really started to recognize the shadowier side of contrarian thinking especially when people were against good popular things (like the ice bucket challenge for ALS)... and I soured on empty contrarianism.

Yet, I still felt this underlying sense of differentiation based off of "not being the type that falls into empty contrarianism nor the type that falls into patterns of conformity." The tendency to slice myself away from the crowd was still there, but I had just started to see empty contrarians as "a part of the crowd that doesn't even know they're part of the crowd."

But in my recognition of this, there was a pride in being different and not falling into patterns that so many people fall into.

So, these Shadow patterns have a way of becoming sneakier and more subtle as you grow and mature. So, I was still looking to differentiate and separate myself. I had just dropped the more overt symptom of reflexive contrarianism because I saw the "ordinary human foolishness" in it.

So, I was still carving myself out from everything else and seeing myself as separate and differentiated from the world.

But in one of my Ayahuasca ceremonies, it brought me back and forth between two states.

One was my usual polarization into extraordinariness to the exclusion of ordinariness... and it was showing me how disconnected I was from everything. And it really emphasized how cut off it was making me.

Then, it re-integrated me with ordinariness, and I felt so deeply intertwined with humanity, nature, and the universe at large because I saw the sameness in myself to all other elements of the universe. I was not distinct from anyone or anything at the core. And all this existential pressure was removed from me.

And it brought me back and forth between the state of polarization into extraordinariness and the state of integration with ordinariness. And ordinariness was always a huge fear. But in this, it was everything I'd ever wanted to feel and the entire reason I was trying to differentiate myself in the first place.

But of course, these coping patterns run deep. So, even in my realization of the value of ordinariness, I can use that as a means to differentiate myself because "Look how uniquely wise I am to understand this when most people don't."

[PurpleTree]

1 hour ago, Emerald said:

But in one of my Ayahuasca ceremonies, it brought me back and forth between two states.

 

Did you have the ceremonies with a shaman and in a group setting? I‘m so extraordinary that i just cooked it and drank it myself.

[Socrates]

They all try to cater to Trump and his alleged beliefs. Even the prime minister of my country Greece somehow ended up coming out against the so-called woke stuff.

These grifters only know how to bullshit, it is so annoying to witness. They have no values they just parrot whatever fits them to stay afloat pathetic spineless behavior by unintelligent and self-centered minds.

[Scholar]

21 hours ago, What Am I said:

Good observation regarding the progress that's built on fear producing shaky grounds. Definitely agree there.

I think it's also fair to question rather some of what we saw was actually progress. Does the line between genders really need to become so fuzzy? And does sexuality really need to be ambiguous and deviated from the animal-like drive for a male to impregnate a female and create new members of the species? I may not be the most qualified commenter, but in my opinion, that's a potential recipe for disaster, which could eventually end us. Messing with our act of reproduction on a large scale seems unwise.

The issue is that radicalization occurs because the other side, conservatives, are mocking and threatening the completely valid and basic human dignity of those affected minorities.

Conservatives will use "concern" like yours to invalidate the whole movement, identity and rights of those individuals. They will use empirical data to justify their discriminiation, attitudes of dismissal and so forth.

This is why there is a tendency to fight around the empirical data and to not give an inch to conservatives. If you admit there is a problem, the conservatives will use that to completely destroy all valid things that come with that movement, because fundamentally conservaties function through normalcy.

They want to maintain the status quo, and they are fundamentally fearful of cultural changes. They are blind to the fact that culture has and will always changed, significantly.

 

You are falling into this same trap when you make up horror stories about how civilization might collapse if we challenge gender norms or our ideas around reproduction. You are turning a trivial issue, that will have problems that will correct themselves if humans simply relate consciously to it, and turning it into a fear based existential problem. Turning something into an existential problem in the end will do nothing but fuel irrational conservative fears and further radicalize the left.

Remember, the demographic collapse is occuring in every country on this planet, it has nothing to do with radical progressive culture around reproductive acts. These kinds of fear based narratives are doubly dangerous because they make us unable to recognize the actual real root cause problems and dynamics that we need for them to be solved.

 

So ironically, on a systemic level, it is your attitude that leads to a fundamental threat to human civilization that is a recipe for disaster. This is what the conservative mind is, you have to realize that this framework of mind is in no way less dangerous than the radical progressive mindset. It just appears to be less dangerous on the surface, especially if you in particular benefit from the status quo.

 

Those who do not benefit from the status quo will have no reason to accept your values. Which is why radical progressives often times reject the status quo completely, and might throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Edited 5 hours ago by Scholar

[zazen]

19 hours ago, Jodistrict said:

Wokeism was a bad idea and unhealthy for society.  It divides people into identity groups, using a perpetrator/victim mythology.  It deflects the public from the problems of real wealth inequality which is why I don’t refer to it as “left” or “progressive”.  It is a massive deflection to worry about pronouns while the issue of equity capital buying up all the houses and farm land is virtually ignored.   Notice how easily wokeism has been embraced by the large corporations and the establishment elites.  While people are fighting each other they aren’t questioning the status quo and threatening the power structure.    

People are too busy fighting between left and right rather than looking above. The irony is that progressives fear Trump dismantling institutions and agencies but are unable to understand why conservatives fear the left dismantling the fabric of reality itself. One is acting irrational, the other is acting reckless in the name of capitalist innovation and anarchic libertarianism. It is natural to fear both.

The problem I see is that only one fear is validated as noble and righteous by the mainstream establishment (the fear of establishment outsiders or those inside wanting to change it) whilst the other fear is mocked as regressive and backwards (the fear of a ideology being untethered from reality).

Wokism is the misdirected and misplaced expression of the souls yearning to transcend the limitations of form - they destroy or deny form instead. The truth is we are biologically conservative (form, boundaried), yet spiritually liberal (formless, boundless). We are lost in translation between two worlds, the duality we are - and this manifests in many ways including politics.

Liberalism honors the formless (God / soul) within each form - thus calling for justice and equality for all. Conservatism honors the stability of form (Gods creation / structure) - thus calling to conserve it. Liberalism taken too far into what we call wokism denies form all together. Conservatism gone too far into what we call fundamentalism see's nothing beyond form.

 

Edited 4 hours ago by zazen

[zazen]

Your body knows about survival, about keeping the heart beating, about building walls against chaos. This is what we call conservatism, and it's not just some political choice - it's written in your bones. Every cell in your body is conservative, fighting like hell to maintain balance, to keep things stable, to stay alive.

But, you're not just a body. You're also this vast, infinite thing that wants to explode beyond every boundary ever drawn. This is the liberal spirit, and it's not some fancy philosophical concept - it's the same force that makes flowers crack through concrete, that makes birds migrate across oceans, that makes humans dream of touching the stars.

These forces aren't enemies. They're lovers in an eternal dance. Your body's wisdom keeps you grounded while your spirit pulls you toward the infinite. Try to deny either one, and you're denying half of what makes you human.

When conservatives get lost in their fear, they forget that safety is meant to serve life, not strangle it. When liberals get drunk on their dreams, they forget that even angels need gravity to push against.

You can't have progress without conservation. This isn't a political statement - it's a fundamental law of existence. Try having your progressive dreams about social justice when you can't breathe. Try pursuing your liberal ideals about personal freedom when you're starving. You can't, and that's not because conservatism is "better" - it's because conservation of basic survival needs is the foundation that makes all progress possible.

The establishment loves to push this false narrative that we have to choose between progress and conservation. It's all a smoke screen that keeps us from seeing the deeper truth: Progress only happens through conservation. Every single advancement in human history happened because we conserved enough stability and security to make that progress possible.

Once we understand that progress requires conservation, we can't be manipulated by simplistic political narratives anymore. We've seen behind the curtain. We've glimpsed the deeper truth about what we really are: A conservative biological machine powered by a progressive spiritual force. Everyone's arguing about whether progressive values or conservative values are "better," while missing the cosmic joke: you are literally made of both.

- Anon 

Edited 4 hours ago by zazen

[What Am I]

@Scholar I had half-typed a long response, but then I realized my depth of thinking on this particular issue is simply not a match for the effort you've put in. Due to its obvious implications and cascading effects, I continue to believe wide-spread aberrant sexual behavior is a likely risk to causing a species' decrease in population, and I think it's a mistake to assume humans would automatically course correct and adapt in a way that'd ensure survival. But I acknowledge there's other angles for which this whole thing can be analyzed, and I'd be lying to myself if I didn't admit there's some truth to your response. I'll keep it in mind and ponder on it. Thanks for taking the time.

One aspect that's still not clear to me is the behavior's association with progress. In this context, what exactly is progress? How are we defining and measuring it? I wonder if freedom would be a more appropriate label.

[Emerald]

10 hours ago, PurpleTree said:

Did you have the ceremonies with a shaman and in a group setting? I‘m so extraordinary that i just cooked it and drank it myself.

I have done 5 out of the 7 of my Ayahuasca journeys at an Ayahuasca church. But the Ayahuasca church had facilitators that have learned from shamans, but who aren't shamans themselves.

[Scholar]

39 minutes ago, What Am I said:

@Scholar I had half-typed a long response, but then I realized my depth of thinking on this particular issue is simply not a match for the effort you've put in. Due to its obvious implications and cascading effects, I continue to believe wide-spread aberrant sexual behavior is a likely risk to causing a species' decrease in population, and I think it's a mistake to assume humans would automatically course correct and adapt in a way that'd ensure survival. But I acknowledge there's other angles for which this whole thing can be analyzed, and I'd be lying to myself if I didn't admit there's some truth to your response. I'll keep it in mind and ponder on it. Thanks for taking the time.

One aspect that's still not clear to me is the behavior's association with progress. In this context, what exactly is progress? How are we defining and measuring it? I wonder if freedom would be a more appropriate label.

Wide-spread aberrant sexual behavior doesn't really cause any of this, it's the falling away of survival pressures that are causing the decline in procreation. Not only do you have contraceptions today, there is simply no incentive to create a family beyond a personal aspiration to do so. Humans were not designed by nature to decide when to have families, rather we naturally would have families as a result of our sexual behavior.

The solution here will never be stopping "aberrant" sexual behavior. People could have no sex at all and they might still not choose to have families. Solving this issue will require far deeper solution than blaming it on deviancy.

 

Progress is a function of human will. 

You can think of it this way: Natural pressures (war, nature, etc) force limitations upon humans in relation to survival, meaning humans have to neglect and suppress their idiosyncratic tendencies in favor of a behavior that will fit into the goal of surviving in a society. This kind of suppression always comes with a certain resistance, given that their will cannot express itself. To maintain this suppression requires a force that is greater than the resistance caused by suppressing that type of behaviors.

For example, homosexuality was deemed illegitimate in the past because to survive required you to have a certain amount of children. Everyone was invested in upholding that norm because the survival pressure was real and constant. If all of your children did not have children, that would compromise your survival and their survival. Given that homosexuality does not lead to offspring, such behavior was unacceptable in such a context.

Only an elite class could afford to deem such things acceptable, or not a violation of their masculinity. 

 

As survival pressures subsided, such norms naturally became challenged because the reasons to maintain them were gone. Human will can therefore express itself more freely than it could before.

This is basically what progress is, a freeing of the will of mankind in relation to subsiding survival pressures. Conservatism is an often misguided survival function, which therefore has to be constantly challenged such that we do not restrict the will of humans for unnecessary reasons, and therefore violating their liberty and dignity.

 

In the end, all of civilization is an attempt to express and maximally express human will. This is why some ideologies fundamentally fail once they cease to best express human will, such as religion.

 

Today's ideologies fail in that they compromise human will by creating actors who inevitably behave and think in ways that compromises their own will.

 

In regards to the nature of will, and how it evolves, it is basically a fundamental function of mind or consciousness, and it will flow towards expressing itself such that the least amount of friction within itself is caused. An individual relates to the collective, and the collective relates to the individual, in such a way that a sort of universal expression of will is achieved, that over time removes frictions.

 

You have to understand here that we are talking about natural forces. Suffering is friction, metaphysically speaking, and the whole point of suffering to the cessation of itself. This means that over time the natural progression will be the resolution of friction. That is the motion of history.

Edited 1 hour ago by Scholar

[Basman]

On 16/11/2024 at 5:50 PM, Nemra said:

Well, homosexuality was condemned, and still they are in other places.

Perhaps one should wonder why the standard paradigm only included heterosexuality.

Homophobia was spread a lot by abrahamic religion I believe. In a general sense, suspect that it has something to do with perceiving homosexuals as a weakness and unproductive. Societies tend to be extra resistant to changing male gender roles, probably because men are more fundamental for a functional society.

Its a cultural issue, hence why you can accept homosexuals in one culture an not the other.

[Scholar]

25 minutes ago, Basman said:

Homophobia was spread a lot by abrahamic religion I believe. In a general sense, suspect that it has something to do with perceiving homosexuals as a weakness and unproductive. Societies tend to be extra resistant to changing male gender roles, probably because men are more fundamental for a functional society.

Its a cultural issue, hence why you can accept homosexuals in one culture an not the other.

The reason was that you had to have children to ensure your survival in an agricultural society. You can't just have one of your children go "Well I don't want to have sex with women/men sorry, not gonna give you any grandchildren!".
Both the survival of the child was compromised (people relied on offspring for their survival) as was as the parent who also relies on his grandchildren for survival.

There are all sorts of other reasons but I think this was the main driver of homophobia.

 

Basically, homophobia served the same function as heterosexuality in general serves, ensuring that individuals have children. Most people are repulsed by homosexual behavior (that's what heterosexuality is), as they are with for example incestuous behavior. The moral norms are then a result of an unconscious bias.

Edited 19 minutes ago by Scholar

[What Am I]

54 minutes ago, Scholar said:

Wide-spread aberrant sexual behavior doesn't really cause any of this, it's the falling away of survival pressures that are causing the decline in procreation. Not only do you have contraceptions today, there is simply no incentive to create a family beyond a personal aspiration to do so. Humans were not designed by nature to decide when to have families, rather we naturally would have families as a result of our sexual behavior.

The solution here will never be stopping "aberrant" sexual behavior. People could have no sex at all and they might still not choose to have families. Solving this issue will require far deeper solution than blaming it on deviancy.

If we're talking about causes that'd be significant contributors, at least at this moment in time, I'd probably agree it's not in the top five or anything. I've heard the explanation regarding the lack of survival pressures elsewhere, and I believe as well that it's likely the main cause of our current situation.

Just to clarify, I didn't mean for the use of the word "aberrant" in a derogatory sense, but rather in its raw meaning as a deviation from what is typical, without negative connotations associated. Believe me, I've watched unusual porn before as well, so I'm not trying to be hypocritical.

54 minutes ago, Scholar said:

This is basically what progress is, a freeing of the will of mankind in relation to subsiding survival pressures. Conservatism is an often misguided survival function, which therefore has to be constantly challenged such that we do not restrict the will of humans for unnecessary reasons, and therefore violating their liberty and dignity.

Wow, quite an elegant definition. So it almost sounds like my suggestion of the alternative word "freedom" may actually apply. The freedom for each individual to express whatever it is they desire, barring any survival pressures that may stifle that freedom out of necessity. It's a lovely concept and a beautiful vision.

But a part of me still wonders if mankind can handle the degree of responsibility needed to cohesively maintain a functioning society while continuing to expand the bounds of freedom into uncharted territory. I guess the retort would be that freedom will naturally continue to expand, but only so far as is permitted by circumstance? And we'd even likely go through periods of a retraction of freedom when survival suddenly becomes a higher priority.

It may be the case that my whole worry is that the train eventually skips off its rails and loses the possibility of re-railing. But I guess you'd say that's a manifestation of the conservative mindset consisting of an outsized concern for survival. Do you see any amount of value in the conservative stance, though? A balancing force to progress seems like it'd have the potential to temper inappropriate excesses. Or is it something that needs to be cast off entirely?

Edited 9 minutes ago by What Am I