Hacker News Reader

Comment by RhysU | Hacker News Reader

I believe you are sincere. Sincerity has nothing to do with virtue signaling.

That you felt the need to publicly separate yourself from the "sociopaths" so we'd all certainly know what a virtuous person you are is the crux of it. It's not that you stated a belief. It's that, in the same breath, you pooped on everyone not holding that belief. The disdain added nothing aside from in-group signaling.

Consider: "I believe the earth is round" vs "I believe the earth is round and the flat earthers are mouth breathers". The second drips with disdain. It has nothing to do with the speaker's earth-roundness belief. It only serves to establish in-vs-out group.

View on HN

>That you felt the need to publicly separate yourself from the "sociopaths" so we'd all certainly know what a virtuous person you are is the crux of it

I apologize; while reading the thread on my phone, I thought you were responding to me, but you're not. I'll still respond, though.

> I believe you are sincere. Sincerity has nothing to do with virtue signaling.

Virtue signaling is about intent. Honestly stating a genuinely held belief because you believe it and want to communicate it is not virtue signaling.

In your response, you're making an assumption about the person who wrote the comment. You're assuming that they wrote the comment "so we'd all certainly know what a virtuous person you are." But that's your assumption. You don't know that.

So why are you making that assumption? People often extrapolate their own motivations when judging the behavior of others. That's why I'm suspicious of people who accuse others of virtue-signalling. It conveys something about their inner state and their own motivations.

This is a great response, thank you.

I disagree that intent has anything to do with virtue signaling. People frequently are driven by their subconscious, especially in matters of tribal belonging.

There is a delicious irony in questioning the motivations of someone who is questioning your motivations.

>I disagree that intent has anything to do with virtue signaling

This is the very first sentence on Wikipedia: "Virtue signalling is the act of expressing opinions or stances that align with popular moral values, often through social media, with the intent of demonstrating one's good character."

Unless we share a common understanding of the term, we can't have a meaningful discussion about it.

>There is a delicious irony in questioning the motivations of someone who is questioning your motivations.

I'm not sure why it is ironic. Instead, it seems evident that by bringing up other people's motivations, we are revealing something about what we think motivates people to act, and thus about our own motivation to act.

Accusing somebody of virtue signaling provides evidence for the accuser's way of thinking, but not for the accused's.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com