[darkengine]

Maybe I'm missing some nuance here, but most of these (excepting maybe "Complicated explanations are suspect" and "All interconnection is apparent") just seem like different manifestations of fundamental attribution error.

[tasty_freeze]

Even if they can all be reduced one one generic complaint, seeing the specific manifestations of is spelled out is quite helpful.

In the same way, we teach students the derived results of mathematics, instead of just telling them the axioms and assume they can figure out the consequences themselves.

[catalogia]

It reads like a list of fairly reasonable (imho) grievances, but except for a few they don't really seem related to the cargo cult phenomenon.

Namely these two do seem related to cargo cults: "The end supports the explanation of the means: A successful person's explanation of the means of his success is highly credible by the very fact of his success." "Emulate the purported behavior of successful people: This is the key to the cargo cult. To enjoy the success of another, just mimic his rituals."

But for instance, this one: "Good intentions suffice: You can always apologize." How is a culture of casual forgiveness related to cargo cults? That sounds like a Protestant approach to the topic of forgiveness, and insofar as Protestantism has been influential in America that approach to forgiveness probably does accurately generalize the American public. But where is the cargo cult angle?

[f_nachos]

Because it's magical thinking to believe that the harm caused by the consequences of your actions is ameliorated by your intentions beforehand or your apology afterward. A civilization built on Protestantism wouldn't be less superstitious for holding these as cultural values. Which is where I guess the cult part comes in.

[catalogia]

It may well be magical thinking, but magical thinking isn't synonymous with cargo cults. Cargo cults seem like a particular sort of magical thinking; a subset of magical thinking. As I understand the concept, a cargo cult is specifically characterized by one group of people superficially emulating another without understanding the underlying mechanisms in play.

If the Protestant approach to forgiveness is relating to cargo cults, perhaps it's because they witnessed Catholics talk about forgiveness and decided to adopt that aspect of the Catholic philosophy without also appreciating the importance of the Catholic concept of penance (Catholics talk about forgiveness a lot, but don't give so freely as Protestants.) So perhaps Protestants are cargo culting Catholics.

I know a few Catholics who'd probably smirk in agreement with the above, but I'm not convinced of it myself. I'm neither a Protestant nor a Catholic and although I was raised as one and grew up surrounded by the other, I never felt I understood either particularly well. So it's possible I've gotten it all wrong.

[Tehdasi]

Same way as 'French fries': 1) are not french 2) are not fried 3) have to be made of potato 4) are not 'frenched' 5) etc

The author was prolly just picking a name that the mentality was most like.

[catalogia]

Sorry for getting into the weeds here, but as I understand them, french fries are indeed fried (sometimes baked, which is heretical, but usually fried), are from either France or Belgium depending on who you believe, and are not necessarily made out of potato (Yam french fries are very popular, though whether or not yams are truly potatoes is over my pay grade.)

I think I take your general meaning though.

[rantwasp]

the way i read is it that we have the American Cargo Cult and these are some principles that help explain what it is. E.g. "Good intentions suffice: You can always apologize." When you see everyone just apologizing you internalize that just having good intentions suffice without understanding why this may be the case.

[H8crilA]

At least those do not seem to be:

> There is no long term

> Certainty is strength, doubt is weakness

> Emulate the purported behavior of successful people

> The end supports the explanation of the means

But you're right in that it can be explained by fundamental attribution error in some part. It's still more understandable when the quite broad cognitive error (it's called fundamental for a reason!) is instantiated to some common manifestations.