LADY: People are not the same. There are two kinds, utterly distinct.
THIGPEN: What would those be, madam, the two Kinds?
The above is from the Coen brothers’ Ballad of Buster Scruggs. I recommend watching it, especially the story at the end, where five people answer the above question. What categories you divide people into say as much about you as which side you perceive yourself on.
These days, all discussions of “two kinds of people” get drafted into the culture war. STEM vs wordcels, low-trust vs high-trust — everything gets mapped onto left vs right (very awkwardly.) That has kind of ended the art of making new, odd dichotomies completely off the political spectrum. Which itself opens an opportunity for anyone creative and paying attention to come up with fresh ones and reap the sweet sweet clout.
That’s what this blog is. Every post will be about a particular binary. Mostly new or obscure ones that don’t already have a billion posts arguing about them, though if I have some insight on an old reliable dichotomy, I’ll cover that too. My comparative advantage is in new ideas, not fresh insight porn about left/right, top/bottom, or extro/introverted.
If I’m really ambitious, I want to add an interactive element where readers select which half of the binary they’re on each post, tracking them over time to create some sort of cyclopean MBTI with infinite coordinates. Some day.
But first, three caveats:
1. Yes, I know “the map is not the territory” and “all models are lies but some are useful.” Ideas will fall between the poles, or off the spectrum, or combine elements of both. But that doesn’t mean there aren’t central anchors that contain most of the data points. I’m going to speak in absolutes (because it’s shorter), when the correct verbiage would be “for most people, with many exceptions.”
2. I’m only putting up binaries I find interesting, which means I find both options sympathetic. I could see myself feeling either way depending on context. This is not a secret way to smuggle in my biases or ego-inflate you for being on the side all the good and smart people are on. That said, I remain an imperfect and subjective writer — if my description comes across as favoring one side, comment on what I may be missing.
3. These binaries are not really about people. They’re about ways of thinking. Think of them as opposing tools, like voice and writing — sometimes you use one, sometimes the other, and their advantages depend on what you want to accomplish. Some people write more, others talk more, but you’d rarely call one person “a writer” and the other “a talker.”
However, over large groups, you get a uniformity based on just the parts of people that are 1 or 0, and that has a consistency of its own. Someone might only be 70% right-wing, but those parts of them that are rightist combine with the similar parts of other people to form a group entity that entirely follows right-wing logic.
Ideally, from reading this blog, I want you to see these binaries as two different tools you can consciously choose depending on your goals.
Format
Each post follows the same structure. First, a short casual piece explaining the duality. Then a three panel comic. You can stop there, if you get the idea.
But if you’re still confused (or just interested enough to keep going), click “Read more” for a longer effortpost with more examples and a thoughtful conclusion, followed by some citations of useful source material. Then a back-and-forth between two characters arguing different sides of the binary as a humorous coda. You don’t have to read any of the extra substance to get the idea, but it should be fun if you do.
I’ve got over a dozen entries ready to go on a semi-weekly schedule (Monday and Thursday mornings). I’m starting with the three I consider most meta and perspective-defining.
But first, the controversy that must be addressed and even why I am making this blog…….
The AI Thing
The iconic binary of our times is Human vs AI. And this blog is made by both.
The format I described comes to about 12,000 words a week. I, bambamramfan, would get very bored before writing that even once. I have at least 20 posts planned.
So here is what I’m doing: I wrote a style guide and listed every binary I’ve observed. I ask Claude to write each post. I read it, suggest changes, go through a couple iterations of editing. The posts come out pretty good? Not perfect, but my writing isn’t perfect either. I think they sound like a person, not an obsequious bot. But who am I to tell.
That’s your job. In addition to discussing the concepts in the comments, let’s talk about the process too. What sounds particularly AI-like? What’s well written, what’s annoying? What changes would make it better? Pick apart this work to death, but please talk about the work itself, not what sama said at some marketing summit.
Sometimes the AI raised points I specifically disagreed with. I kept them when they still made for a good post. And at some point (not early on) I’m going to ask the AI to come up entirely with its own binary. I won’t tell you when, so make a comment when you think you spot it.
Ethics footnote
I think AI is a bad idea to develop right now, and I would prefer if it was banned. I have no idea what the long-term ethical and economic ramifications will be, and I hesitate to walk into potential catastrophe without a guide.
But the tool is here and it is important to know what it can do. This is an experiment, not an endorsement of generating endless slop for money. At no point did I name another writer and ask the AI to imitate them. I described the writing style I wanted with non-proper nouns. There will still be some resemblance to other writers — if anyone feels stolen from, I apologize.
Alt Binaries 