Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by Analemma_ | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

Analemma_

Are you one of those people who equates any mention whatsoever of Trump as "being needlessly political"?

View on HN

No, but this one was.

Could you clarify what was needlessly political? I can't seem to find anything political there at all.

Injecting a controversial (and mostly detested here) political figure into an unrelated topic.

I meant actual examples. But on second read I assume this is about the blog in general and not this post in particular that doesn't seem to have any Trump references.

Not at all. But bringing him up in an unrelated post on a technical blog just screams "virtue signaling" to me.

When you feel strongly about something and write about it, you aren't virtue signalling, you're expressing your view. If you have any reason to take the rather uncharitable stance that his views on Trump are inauthentic, then post them, otherwise it's better just to assume that people who say things you disagree with actually think those things rather than are just saying them to look good.

Accusing others of "virtue signaling" is a much clearer example of "virtue signaling" in my opinion, since it's a particular population that tends to do it, and is used primarily to put down those they disagree with and mark them as belonging to a different group rather than to actually make any kind of meaningful point.

I'm curious what I said that sounded to you like "his stated views on Trump aren't authentic."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtue_signalling

    Virtue signalling is the conspicuous expression of moral
    values done primarily with the intent of enhancing
    standing within a social group.

I don't think Aaronson states his views on Trump with the hopes of increasing his social status. He does it because it's just what he feels and wants to express himself.

And which part of that definition has anything to do with the views being inauthentic?

I feel like I'm taking crazy pills here.

When you express a view that you don't hold in order to receive social approval, or when you express a view that you hold lightly with more intensity and frequency than you would except for your desire to receive social approval you are being inauthentic.

The whole value of the phrase 'virtue signalling' is that it accuses those you disagree with of inauthenticity. If I'm saying a thing I genuinely believe because I genuinely believe it, I'm not virtue signalling. It's only if the reason for saying the thing is to gain social approval that it's 'virtue signalling'. Any assumption that your opponent is doing something for this reason is uncharitable, and kills rational debate. It's essentially an ad hominem attack.

It's also ignoring the fairly detailed entry that Scott posted explaining in his own words why he started talking about Trump in his blog: http://www.scottaaronson.com/blog/?p=2777 when previously he'd avoided the subject.

Maybe it is virtue signalling, or maybe he really did feel as he claimed, that he had a moral responsibility to speak out against Trump. If you assume that it is only 'virtue signalling', you are cutting yourself off from engaging with his points.

You're correct.

Virtue signalling is usually done by people who sincerely believe the values they espouse - but they emphasize or show those values in order to gain or reinforce social status within the group. It usually is done by proclaiming things you hate, rather than things you like.

If the comment adds nothing besides an "I'm with you guys, that's the worst", it's fair to see and describe it as virtue signalling.

And yes, it happens on both sides of the aisle - heard lots of conservatives proclaiming their distaste for Obama over the last decade.

>virtue signaling

You know that was an interesting and useful concept before you guys decided to turn into yet another empty insult to fling at people.

It's still an interesting and useful concept even if it's also used as an insult. (Much like you might refer to a colleague's tight new shirt and gold chain as a "mating display" without disparaging biologists' use of the term.)

I mean he also pokes fun at his children, himself, and posted a rap video about theoretical computer science on his blog. His blog is not exactly the Annals here... I think he is more than welcome to write about whatever he damn pleases and if you disagree you are more than welcome to argue in his comment sections (and more than likely lose)

Of course he's welcome to write about whatever he likes. It's his blog.

But I'm welcome to roll my eyes at it.

I'm rolling my eyes at your eye rolling! How deep can we go?!

In what world is Scott Aaronson, a professor whose primary research area is computational complexity, unrelated to a P=NP solution?

I was saying that President Trump is unrelated to the usual topics on that blog.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com