Why Are Political Discussions More Heated Than Scientific Ones?

[klimatos]

I have noticed that political threads get locked or terminated far more frequently than is the case with more scientific ones. Sometimes this is because posters wander far off the OP topic, but more often it appears that incivility simply reaches unacceptable levels.

I assume that most of us posting here are either scientists or have scientific leanings. Why can’t we keep the same level of objectivity and dispassionate dialog in our political postings as we do in our scientific ones. Is there some sort of biological “switch” in our brains that is in one position when we discuss science and another position when we discuss politics?

Getting emotional rarely ever convinces your opponent of the merit of your views. A calm, objective, dispassionate presentation is far more effective. I give you higher education as a case in point. Have you ever experienced a Physics professor ranting at his/her class? (Yes, I suppose that somewhere this has happened. But it is extremely rare.)

Good manners are the lubrication of any society. Let us all try to use good manners and reduce useless friction.

 

[Evo]

Nice post.

Unfortunately politics are mostly personal beliefs, like religious beliefs, people tend to have very intense feelings regarding their beliefs and an attack on their beliefs is taken as a personal attack.

I'm all for going to a system I see used at other forums that deal with heated topics. All posts are put into moderation and hidden from view until approved.

It's rather hard to have a flame war if your post doesn't show up for 24 hours and the response in another 24 hours. You still get to say your piece, it's just at a much slower pace.

 

[Pengwuino]

Personally, it seems that the scientific threads are more about exchanging information that people know intimately about. However, politics seems more about defending your own subjective beliefs even though your average person on here doesn't have nearly the depth of knowledge in political issues as they do in their scientific beliefs.

Then again, I've noticed certain people on the forum have never posted a single post out of GD/P&WR... smells like Troll.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Politics cannot typically be quantified, or absolute answers determined, and what might seem perfectly reasonable to one person might seem terribly unreasonable to another. But beyond beliefs and perceptions, and unlike scientific discussions which do not typically affect one personally, the outcomes of political events can have profound, immediate, and dramatic effects on our futures.. The laws of physics are what they are, but political events help to shape our lives. So politics isn't just about beliefs, it is about self preservation.

For example, I don't just disagree with people like Bachmann. I find the notion of someone like her as President, or even worse, Palin, terrifying! There would be real consequences, just as there were real consequences when Bush won over Gore. No doubt, but for some hanging chads, history would look quite different.

 

[Evo]

Then again, I've noticed certain people on the forum have never posted a single post out of GD/P&WR... smells like Troll.

That's another thing we are considering, in order to be allowed to post in P&WA, members will first need to have a minimum of 500 posts outside of the lounge. This will ensure that P&WA is a perk for dedicated members.

 

[Hlafordlaes]

Excellent point, klimatos. IMO, once you have learned and adopted a scientific approach to one domain, and experienced how positive that can be, it seems obvious that reason, evidence and fact (when available) should guide other areas, too. As Evo points out, many topics are areas for personal belief and feelings. Yet one should think these would be the ones we'd all concentrate on most, well aware of the ill effects of cognitive bias.

Perhaps it's too lonely and alienating. Sir Francis Bacon's excellent thoughts on the "idols of the mind" (see his wiki entry) seem to have had the effect of making him, in the eyes of others, excessively circumspect, and his bio reads as one of a lonely and morose individual. I have argued against or about many aspects of patriotism, nationalism, religious belief systems, and cultural mores and values, only to find that rather than join me in dispelling unfortunate myths, a great many friends, colleagues and of course internet posters simply blow up at the very idea of questioning cherished, yet unexamined, positions. In the case of the internet, this is normally on boards dedicated to science, engineering, or debunking fraudulent claims. I've learned the hard way that there is no profession that provides any sort of immunity to prejudice (not to imply that I've unearthed and dealt with all of my own, though I work on it.)

And taking things a step further by shining a honest light on one's self-image can be disastrous when others misunderstand that as a sign of weakness, rather than strength. The greatest myths of all are the ones we tell ourselves, about ourselves.

 

[Evo]

Another problem with online posting is that it is much too easy to misunderstand the intent behind what is said. Without facial expressions, tone of voice, body language, etc... Things are misunderstood, and at the fast rate people post, things can get really off track, or get nasty very quick. Then emotions run high, tempers flare, people take sides in the *fight* that should never have become a fight.

This is a good discussion, thanks klimatos for starting it and excellent input from all.

By the time I wake up tomorrow, I'm sure it will have devolved into arguments over who is more right about how to post.

<sigh>

 

[Hlafordlaes]

Politics cannot typically be quantified, or absolute answers determined, and what might seem perfectly reasonable to one person might seem terribly unreasonable to another. But beyond beliefs and perceptions, and unlike scientific discussions which do not typically affect one personally, the outcomes of political events can have profound, immediate, and dramatic effects on our futures.. The laws of physics are what they are, but political events help to shape our lives. So politics isn't just about beliefs, it is about self preservation...

I agree, yet feel there is a bit more to be said about the various issues that arise in political discourse. Many in fact are susceptible to science, such as global warming, etc. And though economics is a profession with wildly differing stances, there are historical facts that are rarely brought to bear in political discussion. Tracking US deficits over the last 30 years, and as a result of which parties in power and policies undertaken, is a case in point. I confess I am quite shocked that many of the healthy measures taken following the Great Depression in terms of banking regulations are so easily and blithely dismissed in the ideologically-driven sound-biting that passes for discourse currently. That said, I am drifting ever more closely to George Carlin's take on politics in his late work.

Oh, and Evo, please don't implement that policy of 500 posts in the science sections you mentioned. Lesser lights such as myself would be quite left out in the cold!

 

[micromass]

That's another thing we are considering, in order to be allowed to post in P&WA, members will first need to have a minimum of 500 posts outside of the lounge. This will ensure that P&WA is a perk for dedicated members.

May I suggest this:

- people with 500 posts get to post immediately here
- people without 500 posts first need their post approved by a mentor

 

[Evo]

Oh, and Evo, please don't implement that policy of 500 posts in the science sections you mentioned. Lesser lights such as myself would be quite left out in the cold!

You can always make a large cash contribution to the "Evo needs money" foundation.

Joking, Greg would frown on it.

How about low post count members have to have a political discussion with Russ or I for 3 hours and if you can keep your cool, you are given probationary access?

 

[Evo]

May I suggest this:

- people with 500 posts get to post immediately here
- people without 500 posts first need their post approved by a mentor

Oooh, now that's an idea, I like that!

 

[micromass]

How about low post count members have to have a political discussion with Russ or I for 3 hours and if you can keep your cool, you are given probationary access?

Yah, that would be nobody

 

[Evo]

Yah, that would be nobody

Shhhh, let them have hope.

 

[Hlafordlaes]

Some boards require a paid subscription to post in the open discussion areas, but that's not good for students nor old folk on tight budgets. Maybe some sort of rating system that would send unruly posters who are getting out of hand into forced moderation before publication? "Punish" only those who prove irksome?

 

[Evo]

Some boards require a paid subscription to post in the open discussion areas, but that's not good for students nor old folk on tight budgets. Maybe some sort of rating system that would send unruly posters who are getting out of hand into forced moderation before publication? "Punish" only those who prove irksome?

The thing is that everyone is bound to be irksome to someone at some point. If it's an attitude issue, we usually have at least 2 mentors look at the posts, the problem is that *hot* threads can add another 2 pages in the time it takes to get a 2nd opinion, by that time, practically every member posting in the thread has been irksome. Some times, we will lock pending moderation, or put the whole thread in moderation, which deletes it from view. it takes a lot of the mentor's time to go back through pages of posts, trying to figure out if the member was goaded, or they went off the handle on their own, do we perform thread surgery, give infractions, warnings, etc... then there are the inevitable replies "he started it!", "how dare you censor me!", "you've taken away my first ammendment rights!", the complaints, the finger pointing, the accusations.

P&WA can become a black hole for mentors. We're only human.

What members can do to help is to report any post that is causing trouble, and especially if it is a guideline violation. I would much rather read a few reports then find a thread has derailed and try to figure out what happened on my own. Reported posts are confidential.

 

[Newai]

I had suggested once that forums build an option to kick out a member from a specific thread so others may continue the discussion. It's strange that one or two immature people can cause everyone to get locked out of the thread.

 

[Evo]

I had suggested once that forums build an option to kick out a member from a specific thread so others may continue the discussion. It's strange that one or two immature people can cause everyone to get locked out of the thread.

In those cases the value of the thread is evaluated. Is there really anything more of value to be added or has the thread been repeating the same points? It's surpising how many threads that run into trouble haven't had anything new added in some time. In long threads, people often enter and just repeat something already discussed and resolved 3 pages earlier.

There are many times a single trouble maker or crank will be removed while the thread remains open.

 

[ThomasT]

I have noticed that political threads get locked or terminated far more frequently than is the case with more scientific ones. Sometimes this is because posters wander far off the OP topic, but more often it appears that incivility simply reaches unacceptable levels.

I assume that most of us posting here are either scientists or have scientific leanings. Why can’t we keep the same level of objectivity and dispassionate dialog in our political postings as we do in our scientific ones. Is there some sort of biological “switch” in our brains that is in one position when we discuss science and another position when we discuss politics?

Getting emotional rarely ever convinces your opponent of the merit of your views. A calm, objective, dispassionate presentation is far more effective. I give you higher education as a case in point. Have you ever experienced a Physics professor ranting at his/her class? (Yes, I suppose that somewhere this has happened. But it is extremely rare.)

Good manners are the lubrication of any society. Let us all try to use good manners and reduce useless friction.

I take it that your OP is in response to the turn that the discourse in a recent thread (on whether the US should veto a Palestinian statehood resolution in the UN) took. I didn't see exactly why the thread was deleted or removed for moderation, as it was gone when I returned here tonight. Let me guess, were the Israeli and the Palestinian digressing to name calling and such? Too bad. But it's an understandably highly charged subject. On a positive (personal) note, each time I return to consider things in the ME I learn something.

Anyway, of course I agree with the theme of your OP.

 

[Evo]

I take it that your OP is in response to the turn that the discourse in a recent thread (on whether the US should veto a Palestinian statehood resolution in the UN) took. I didn't see exactly why the thread was deleted or removed for moderation, as it was gone when I returned here tonight. Let me guess, were the Israeli and the Palestinian digressing to name calling and such? Too bad. But it's an understandably highly charged subject. On a positive (personal) note, each time I return to consider things in the ME I learn something.

Anyway, of course I agree with the theme of your OP.

Multiple mentors work in P&WA, the decision to delete that thread was made by another mentor that rarely posts in P&WA. I don't believe that they even posted in the thread. I found out about it when I woke up. After reading the last two pages, I had to agree with them.

We had a discussion after the deletion and it was decided that the topic always resulted in fighting, got people into trouble, and ultimately closed/deleted, so a decision was made to make the topic off limits for now.

 

[ThomasT]

Multiple mentors work in P&WA, the decision to delete that thread was made by another mentor that rarely posts in P&WA. I found out about it when I woke up. After reading the last two pages, I had to agree with them.

We had a discussion after the deletion and it was decided that the topic always resulted in fighting, got people into trouble, and ultimately closed/deleted, so a decision was made to make the topic off limits for now.

Just as well. For anybody who's really interested in researching the topic there's lots of info on the internet to sift through and evaluate.

On the other hand, it might be argued that it's important to maintain an active dialogue on the subject. Would it be possible to just delete the obviously emotionally contentious posts?

 

[Evo]

Would it be possible to just delete the obviously emotionally contentious posts?

That would have been too much, because when you start deleting, you have to be aware of bad parts that were quoted, how to leave the ok parts of a post in, and only cut out the bad. The remaining posts must make sense, not be pages of disjointed sentences.

So, in an active thread, no.

 

[klimatos]

Nice post.

Unfortunately politics are mostly personal beliefs, like religious beliefs, people tend to have very intense feelings regarding their beliefs and an attack on their beliefs is taken as a personal attack.

I'm all for going to a system I see used at other forums that deal with heated topics. All posts are put into moderation and hidden from view until approved.

It's rather hard to have a flame war if your post doesn't show up for 24 hours and the response in another 24 hours. You still get to say your piece, it's just at a much slower pace.

Evo, That's a good idea. I am a little bit unclear as to what would happen to highly charged posts during that 24-hour "time out". Would they be edited to remove offensive content, deleted in their entirety, published "as-is" with a warning, or simply as posted. What are your thoughts?

 

[Evo]

Evo, That's a good idea. I am a little bit unclear as to what would happen to highly charged posts during that 24-hour "time out". Would they be edited to remove offensive content, deleted in their entirety, published "as-is" with a warning, or simply as posted. What are your thoughts?

Most posts would probably be posted as is. Obviously, any offensive content in violation of our guidelines would be removed. Also, it would allow for us to request missing citations before a post was approved. Off topic posts would be removed. Of course it will still have the personal opinions (within the guielines) so people will still get upset, but the delays in posts appearing should help defuse a sudden flury of flaming posts.

Moderation first would just help defuse arguments and allow mentors to keep posts calm and accurate. It won't solve all problems.

 

[klimatos]

How about low post count members have to have a political discussion with Russ or I for 3 hours and if you can keep your cool, you are given probationary access?

I'd go for that. I think it might be fun. In my eighty years of pissing people off, I have been roundly insulted by individuals ranging from cabinet ministers to camel drivers. The camel drivers were poetic and imaginative. The cabinet ministers were just foul-mouthed.

One of the camel-drivers favorites was to offer some rials and say, "Here take this money and go buy your mother a new red dress--that she may continue to prosper in her chosen profession!"

 

[klimatos]

For example, I don't just disagree with people like Bachmann. I find the notion of someone like her as President, or even worse, Palin, terrifying! There would be real consequences, just as there were real consequences when Bush won over Gore. No doubt, but for some hanging chads, history would look quite different.

Ivan,

I suspect a Democrat lurking behind those bushy eyebrows and beard. I myself am a member of the Democratic Central Committee for our county. Unfortunately, registered Republicans outnumber registered Democrats by a two-to-one margin. When approached by local Democratic candidates for campaign contributions, I always refuse. When asked why, I paraphrase Mark Twain and respond, "All the fools in town are on your opponent's side. And that's a majority in any community!"

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Ivan,

I suspect a Democrat lurking behind those bushy eyebrows and beard. I myself am a member of the Democratic Central Committee for our county. Unfortunately, registered Republicans outnumber registered Democrats by a two-to-one margin. When approached by local Democratic candidates for campaign contributions, I always refuse. When asked why, I paraphrase Mark Twain and respond, "All the fools in town are on your opponent's side. And that's a majority in any community!"

I happen to favor the Dems right now because I am strongly anti-Republican - mainly anti-tea party, anti-Palin, etc. And I do like Obama. I think he is an incredibly talented and capable politician. However, I also campaigned for Reagan, collected sigs for Ross Perot [didn't vote for him], typically voted Republican until GHWB, almost never vote Republican since GWB, am a registered Independent and have been for about twenty years. I've never been fond of the extreme left, but this right-wing extremism is unlike anything I've seen in my lifetime. I think its dangerous and destructive. Moderate Republicans frequently annoy me, and we often may not agree on certain issues at this particular time, but I am still a fiscal conservative and social libertarian at heart. But the Rovians and now the tea party candidates are alien to me. I want no part of a country run by people like this.

When you see Bush nationalizing banks and Paulson asking for a $trillion in government handouts to save Wall Street, it's time to throw out the ideological labels. In times like these they don't apply. Instead, the tea party has taken labels to an entirely new level - they just make up the truth up as they go!

I don't know any other way to say it. My biggest beef with the right does not come down to legitimate differences of opinion. It is about the integrity of the people running the party.

 

[Ryumast3r]

Politics is just one of those more emotional topics (like religion) that can "ruin relationships" so to speak. It's intrinsically more emotional than say... mathematics because it deals with beliefs, as opposed to (simply put) facts. Facts in politics can be interpreted many different ways. Case in point: bailouts that occurred in the 1930's. Some people think they helped, some thing they hurt the system. Neither side can adequately "prove" to the other side that they are correct, and since it's an emotional topic, emotions run high and the next thing you know they're both calling each other stupid.

If there is a troll, well, they're easy enough to spot, and I don't even mean people who take the "wrong" view just to argue a point so that it's more adequately shown, and once you find them, just give them warnings. Not always that simple, but it can help.

Really, the best thing you can do sometimes is just take a day off.

I think a lot of this comes down to poster responsibility in being able to tell when their emotions have run a muck. Simple test: If you leave the computer for 15 minutes and do something that "cools you off" and you come back and you don't feel the need to change anything at all about your post, well it is more likely than not a relatively "good" post (in terms of name-calling and all that). Again, not a perfect system, but nothing is.

 

[Bobbywhy]

I am an American and consider participating here on PF in P&WA an honor because I presume many of our members are well-educated and so contribute well-reasoned and thoughtful posts. This is a unique opportunity for me to exchange ideas, comments, and opinions with you other members. I value the experience here immensely. Discussion of Middle East cultures, politics, and events is extremely interesting to me and PF enables exactly this. My attitudes, values, and beliefs today are partly due to the seven years spent living and working in Iran, Turkey, and Egypt. I read, write, and speak those three languages and have extensive cross-cultural experiences. My viewpoints today are definitely different than if I had stayed in Cleveland.

Recently a controversial thread was deleted from view. This was probably owing to a few ignorant members who hijacked the thread by descending into personal insults and vicious name-calling. We were having a serious intellectual dialogue about an important current event with many folks engaged and contributing. I felt a great loss when the thread disappeared because all those valuable comments and ideas are now lost. I had withheld my own opinion (asked for in the OP) for several days because, honestly, I was not sure what my opinion was until then. The exchange helped me decide it and post it.

Our mentors who monitor these threads in the background do an excellent job in maintaining the high quality and ensuring conformance with the guidelines. They always seem to be quite fair. I hope that P&WA does not become limited to members with some arbitrary number of posts. Since the topic of the OP was declared “temporarily off limits”, is there a place where members can see a list of off limits topics to check before posting a new thread?

 

[WhoWee]

Nice post.

Unfortunately politics are mostly personal beliefs, like religious beliefs, people tend to have very intense feelings regarding their beliefs and an attack on their beliefs is taken as a personal attack.

I'm all for going to a system I see used at other forums that deal with heated topics. All posts are put into moderation and hidden from view until approved.

It's rather hard to have a flame war if your post doesn't show up for 24 hours and the response in another 24 hours. You still get to say your piece, it's just at a much slower pace.

A lot can happen in 24 hours - some issues are "come and gone" in that time frame and no longer of interest.

 

[shashankac655]

My opinion is that in scientific discussions do not involve arguments ,it is just about transferring scientific facts from those who know to those who don't know.A scientific discussion or argument can have only one outcome YES or NO but political or social discussions can have multiple contradicting opinions (there are no definite answers) ,all the opinions presented can be right(in some ways) and wrong(in some other ways).

Like some people have already said “Science has definite laws “ and so has definite formulae and after some calculations there will lead to definite answers and I think it’s not same case with politics or social things(their laws can be amended ,even removed)

"Under democracy one party always devotes its chief energies to trying to prove that the other party is unfit to rule - and both commonly succeed, and are right." ~H.L. Mencken, 1956For example right in this forum ,i rarely see PF mentors and Science advisers arguing fiercely with each other in scientific discussions because science can give only one solution and most of the times it's about these people telling others of the facts and busting myths and wrong ideas.

In political discussions these people can get into arguments because there can be no clear perfect answers to solve political and social problems (only time can tell)
In my own thread “Should space exploration only be the developed world’s adventure” (it’s a bit more complicated because it is a combination of political and scientific discussion) one of the PF mentors(russ waters) blasted me off(it’s also my fault to some extent) but some time later another PF mentor (D H)supported me and still Ryan m b doesn’t agree with me and D H.

 

[daveb]

That's another thing we are considering, in order to be allowed to post in P&WA, members will first need to have a minimum of 500 posts outside of the lounge. This will ensure that P&WA is a perk for dedicated members.

While I like this idea, the problem I see with this is that some people have a limited scope upon which they could comment outside of PWA, and this could encourage "spam" type posts. The nuclear engineering thread is not one of the more popular ones, and foe an Earth scientists, I imagine the number of threads that could be commented upon are even worse. True, I try to help out in physics and math when I can, but I prefer to leave that up to theose who have the PhDs, unless it's some aspect of undergrad.

 

[Proton Soup]

I take it that your OP is in response to the turn that the discourse in a recent thread (on whether the US should veto a Palestinian statehood resolution in the UN) took. I didn't see exactly why the thread was deleted or removed for moderation, as it was gone when I returned here tonight. Let me guess, were the Israeli and the Palestinian digressing to name calling and such? Too bad. But it's an understandably highly charged subject. On a positive (personal) note, each time I return to consider things in the ME I learn something.

Anyway, of course I agree with the theme of your OP.

let's just say that israel is always a touchy subject here.

----

and as for newbies and such, some of the worst offenders here are people with the most cred. and you will often see witch-hunts and such over what someone perceives as another person's true beliefs or motives.

 

[Majd100]

I did not insult anybody, but it seems the topics related to Israel are sensitive issue here.

 

[Evo]

Since the topic of the OP was declared “temporarily off limits”, is there a place where members can see a list of off limits topics to check before posting a new thread?

It's the only specific "off limits" topic for P&WA.

The lists of other "closed topics" can be found by clicking the "Rules" link at the top of every page. But they're mostly to do with conspiracy theories from Skepticism and Debunking.

 

[Evo]

I did not insult anybody, but it seems the topics related to Israel are sensitive issue here.

When posting crosses the line to hate mongering, it's not allowed.