Про толерантность
Mar. 13th, 2012 08:25 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
chasovschikPew Research публикует исследование поведения в социальных сетях в зависимости от политической ориентации. Там много интересного. В частности, есть вот такая картинка:
Либералы анально огораживаются банят несогласных значительно интенсивнее, – раза в два, – чем консерваторы, предпочитая существовать в комфортабельных эхо-камерах. Всем, кто в те эхо-камеры заглядывал, это и без того известно, но посмотреть на графики было любопытно.
Mirrored from Gears and Springs.
no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 03:39 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 03:44 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 03:54 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 04:01 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 07:38 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 07:41 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 07:46 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 07:49 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-03-14 09:54 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 03:44 pm (UTC)Ну, на этих графиках примерно зеркальное относительно центра распеделение.
Малость напрягает надпись % of SNS users. Вероятно, она означает все же прочент от соотв. группы. Однако внизу приведена цифра всего опрошенных - 1047. То есть по группам и того меньше, что тоже напрягает.
no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 03:49 pm (UTC)Что касается выборки, то ее размер довольно типичен для подобного рода опросов.
no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 03:58 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 03:53 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 03:58 pm (UTC)Глобальных выводов тут делать не надо, впрочем. 16% и 8% - цифры довольно обнадеживающие, подавляющее большинство народу с обеих сторон все-таки предпочитает друг друга слушать.
no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 03:55 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 04:01 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 04:04 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 04:16 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 04:19 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 04:42 pm (UTC)А боты - святое. Но это не бан на самом деле, там же телемаркетинг, а не человек.
no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 05:00 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 05:28 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 05:43 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 05:54 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 08:17 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 08:19 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-03-13 10:09 pm (UTC)Однако, я не понимаю, какое это имеет отношение к толерантности. По-моему, никакого. Речь идет о желании участвовать в ругани и дискуссиях с неприятными тебе людьми. Мне это, в основном, нравится, многим другим -- нет. Это не по степени толерантности разделение.
no subject
Date: 2012-03-15 02:22 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-03-15 04:14 am (UTC)Hypothetical example: suppose we have this survey on a planet with only two opposing opinions: 1) eating animals is baaad! 2) eating animals is okay.
The vegetarians would be considered liberals on that planet. Funny thing is, meat eaters would't have a problem with the vegetarians (other than finding them slightly to mildly annoying) -- it's the vegetarians that have a serious problem with meat-eaters (consider them murderers).
So it actually makes a lot of sense to me. From my own life, I have some (few) examples of cases where I wouldn't be someone's friend because of fundamental ethical disagreements, and I knew that this judgement was not mutual (i.e. they would tolerate me, but not vice versa). In all these cases, I believe that I was right -- i.e. the difference in mutual tolerance was explained by me having much higher ethical standards than them.
no subject
Date: 2012-03-15 02:20 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-03-15 02:53 pm (UTC)1) Refusing to converse with someone whose opinions you find morally reprehensible does not imply that you are a bad person, or that you're not open minded enough, or "prefer being in an echo chamber", or whatever -- sometimes it's the exactly right thing to do. It *only* depends on what exactly qualifies as "morally reprehensible" in your eyes.
2) If your definition of "morally reprehensible" is wider than someone else's, that alone does not imply that the someone else is better, more open minded, etc. (it could mean that; but there is no correlation. Again, it only depends on the issue in question)
3) It seems to me that you use this survey to conclude something like "the liberals think that they are more tolerant and open minded, but this just goes to show that in fact they are not". If that's what you meant, then I think it doesn't follow at all.
And to your question: I'm trying hard now to remember all the liberals and conservatives I have ever heard... My experience is not enough for statistics, but yes, it seems to be that liberals have a stricter moral standards than conservatives. (Again, *strict* standards are not necessarily a good or a bad thing; it all depends on the issues in question). The way I reached that conclusion was to try to remember all situations where I witnessed (or gave) a moral judgement of the form "this is below my tolerance limit, I don't want to have anything to do with this person", and I was breaking these situations down by liberal/conservative. And yes, it seems to me that this sort of judgement comes from liberals a lot more often. Is your experience different?
no subject
Date: 2012-03-15 03:02 pm (UTC)