> Don't update positively on your extremist beliefs whenever you hear a bad argument against them

Two problems:

1. There are beliefs people hold approximately as strongly as they hold "the Sun will rise tomorrow", so "updating" is kinda irrelevant.

2. How many people actually think any of their beliefs are "extremist"? And if they don't, they won't consider the warning to apply.

And after digging in further:

3. Many people reasonably believe that their discussion circles already filter out a lot of "average people" and thus expect a higher standard of discourse from their ideological opponents. When that still doesn't happen, it naturally seems like stronger evidence.

4. (Insert generic annoyance at veganism discourse here.)

▲

inigyou 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

I am an extremist - I use GrapheneOS and I think the government shouldn't kill people for being gay.

	▲	Lord-Jobo a day ago \| parent [-]
		This really is my big issue with the focus on “extremist, moderate, centrist, whatever”. I don’t care what the centrist or moderate opinion is. It’s been insanely wrong many times throughout history. (1939 German opinions on Jewish people. Public view on MLK at the time of his death) Let’s focus less on “extreme” and more on “unprincipled, uncritical, illogical, undercooked”. If you discard those categories, ignore extreme vs moderate, you get rid of anything that we should consider “bad” that is normally captured by “extreme”

▲

jp_sc 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

One big problem is that lately this kind of extremism has become more like a cult: even considering the idea that the “others” might have some truth (while being wrong about the rest) is treated like blasphemy