Difference between revisions of "Clique signal"

From Issuepedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m (Woozle moved page Belief-clique/signalling to Cliquian signalling: rethinking word forms a bit)
Line 4: Line 4:
 
[[subject::clique signalling]]
 
[[subject::clique signalling]]
 
</hide>
 
</hide>
'''Belief-clique signalling''' (or just [[clique signalling]]) is the practice of signalling one's membership in a [[belief-clique]], typically one or more of the following methods:
+
[[Cliquian signalling]] is the practice of signalling one's membership in a [[clique]], typically one or more of the following methods:
* firmly proclaiming one's [[fixed belief]]s to others ([[/verbal|verbal signalling]])
+
* proclaiming or advocating the clique's [[fixed belief]] ([[/verbal|verbal signalling]])
 
* employing particular words or phrasings common only within the clique (lexical signalling)
 
* employing particular words or phrasings common only within the clique (lexical signalling)
 
** Example: [[creationist]]s often talk about "evidences" instead of "evidence"
 
** Example: [[creationist]]s often talk about "evidences" instead of "evidence"

Revision as of 13:18, 6 October 2020

Cliquian signalling is the practice of signalling one's membership in a clique, typically one or more of the following methods:

  • proclaiming or advocating the clique's fixed belief (verbal signalling)
  • employing particular words or phrasings common only within the clique (lexical signalling)
    • Example: creationists often talk about "evidences" instead of "evidence"
  • performing various cliquian customs – wearing certain clothing, performing rituals, etc.
  • discriminating against others whose beliefs appear to conflict with those of one's clique

Motives

It seems to be the case that people get into a certain mindset where they confuse loyalty to people with loyalty to ideas – they come to believe that if the group believes something, then believing something different is somehow a betrayal of the group. Every discussion becomes an opportunity to proselytize – to defend and spread the belief – rather than a search for truth. Every debate is competitive rather than truth-seeking.

Counterfactual belief-systems therefore often encourage this sort of thinking, as it is the only way their beliefs are likely to survive.