Subject:
|
Re: Fixing the world (was Re: Ldraw cannon
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 10 Dec 1998 05:03:02 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1580 times
|
| |
|
|
Larry Pieniazek wrote
> No no no!! To be selfish is not evil. To be selfish (that is, to do
> things that are pro-survival, to act in your own self interest) is GOOD.
You're using a specific and unconventional definition of "selfish",
most often used IME by evolutionary biologists and geneticists
(both meat and virtual). To most of us "selfish" is similar to
arrogant or unempathetic - it describes someone who cares only
about herself. your usage is more like "longterm self-interest"
than "uncaring".
> You have fallen into the classic looters trap. Renounce teaching that
> tells you to be selfless, for that way lies death.
Larry, there's a fine line between selflessness and long term thought.
On the trivial end, you could keep the money and Lego people send you,
thereby making an immediate gain. And only losing the goodwill of people
you'll never meet. But you honor agreements and promote your good
reputation by "selflessly" doing good things. Why? Long term gain.
I read an interesting study of monastries in Italy that went the
same way - nominally the monks were committing suicidal altruism
from a genetic perspective. But in practice the monks tended to
be from large families, and so having a monk in the family was
genetically cheap, but the payoff was in standing in the community.
So over generations the strategy paid off (families with traditions
of devotion do better, in historical terms).
The same can be said of any form of government - you accept the
current system in the US despite its obvious problems, because
historically the US has done better than most other countries
and therefore your kids have a better chance at a good life there
than in most countries. So you "selflessly" pay high taxes to
support welfare mothers and corporate "sponsorship" because they're
part of a greater good.
Personally I count some of what you advocate as increased altruism
- caring for future generations. Some of the rest of it seems more
like unethical social experimentation.
At what level(s) do you advocate greater selfishness?
> But until you renounce the notion that self sacrifice, whatever the
> reason, or for no reason at all, is a good thing, we have no moral basis
> for discussion, since your morals are fundamentally flawed. Therefore I
> suggest we stop this thread now as we will never fundamentally agree.
I don't believe that altruism is a benefit-free activity. So you're right
in that respect. And yes, morally you and me are worlds apart, but
unfortunately mine don't let me write you off as an idiot quite that
easily.
Moz
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Fixing the world (was Re: Ldraw cannon
|
| <366C4892.B09B99C3@c...OSPAM.com> <F3M8Bn.6nD@lugnet.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit (...) No no no!! To be selfish is not evil. To be selfish (that is, to do things that are pro-survival, to act in (...) (25 years ago, 8-Dec-98, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
94 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
