|
Your continuous donations keep RPGWatch running!
RPGWatch Forums » General Forums » Politics & Religion » University of Berkeley : Rich people have a greater tendency towards greed

Default University of Berkeley : Rich people have a greater tendency towards greed

November 22nd, 2012, 23:54
Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
Beer
that said,
Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
I also think I would bore people to death, because I generally aim for a very serious tone.
That´s more-or-less why the novel approach came to mind.
Because I think you (or anyone, really) can hardly "sell" this kind of ideas via dry, clinical, or or papers.
Starting with "out there" setting (like, for example, contemporaneity, harrharr) and then slowly converging into the vision of yours might be the way to go.
I mean, some bits may stick, dialectix and all .

What you think about most, is what you become.
DeepO is offline

DeepO

DeepO's Avatar
deep outside

#61

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Prague
Posts: 2,285

Default 

November 23rd, 2012, 00:03
Originally Posted by badmofo View Post
Alcohol does the trick too in my experience.
Yes Alcohol makes fools out of everyone that is a fact.

Look you cant tell me money and power does not change or show who they really are.Power always corrupts. History proved that. There will always be a few exceptions but that's not the norm.

If I gave you a few billion dollars what would you do. You wouldn't help the world that's for sure. I know I wouldn't and I prove the theory here correct. It's human nature to always want more and to do whatever we can get away with.

"Beware the potato for he is easily angered."- Couchpotato
Last edited by Couchpotato; November 23rd, 2012 at 00:49.
Couchpotato is offline

Couchpotato

Couchpotato's Avatar
LazyGamer
RPGWatch Team

#62

Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Potato Land
Posts: 8,781

Default 

November 23rd, 2012, 00:24
I think age has something to do with it. The older you get, the more money and power are not as attractive; you discover there is more to life than self!! At least that is what I have learned over MANY years.

If God said it, then that settles it!!

Editor@RPGWatch
Corwin is offline

Corwin

Corwin's Avatar
On The Razorblade of Life
RPGWatch Team

#63

Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 10,347
Send a message via Skype™ to Corwin

Default 

November 23rd, 2012, 00:48
Originally Posted by Corwin View Post
I think age has something to do with it. The older you get, the more money and power are not as attractive; you discover there is more to life than self!! At least that is what I have learned over MANY years.
Then you have reached enlightenment and should be thanful I'm not in charge of any government. I favor imperialism and have to start my dynasty. Emperor sounds nice doesn't it.

Now I just have to assemble my mercenary army for world domination.

"Beware the potato for he is easily angered."- Couchpotato
Couchpotato is offline

Couchpotato

Couchpotato's Avatar
LazyGamer
RPGWatch Team

#64

Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Potato Land
Posts: 8,781

Default 

November 23rd, 2012, 09:21
Originally Posted by Asdraguuhl View Post
@DArtagnan

First of all, our understanding of human psychology, behaviour and society is apparently very different so we won't come to any consensus debating this so there is little point in discussing any related topic in more depth. We'll end up limit cycling anyway.
More than likely.

From what I have understood from your concept, there are three main elements that are key, namely:
1. The involved people share the same philosophy agreeing and accepting voluntarily all rules and play by the rules without cheating.
2. All resources are in abundance and readily available
3. There is already an efficient and durable system in place in the form of infrastructures, machinery, centralised computers, etc., for sustaining life.
1. It's key that the system is voluntary, yes. No one in the world agrees with everything about any system - that's silly. Many people feel they have free will in a democracy - and yet they most certainly don't agree with all aspects. This alternative society is not utopian - that's a static and stupid concept. It's going to evolve.

2. No, not necessarily in abundance. We're going to use technology to synthesize and optimise output. But it's an assumption that we can give everyone on the planet food and shelter - and basic comforts. Some people have attempted to establish whether that's true, and someone like Jacque Fresco says we have more than enough. I personally believe we can synthesize and create a lot more than we think we can, because it's a matter of focusing on that technology.

3. Yes, there are several stages. After the planning/research stage - the infrastructure will be put in place, taking into account future expansion.

But let's be honest, every society that starts with those conditions will work. It is when things start to deviate from the nominal condition when it will be apparent whether the system is robust enough. And that is largely where my criticism lies.
Obviously so.

Anyway, I watched a video of The Venus Project and now the world concept that you describe is much clearer now. You could and perhaps should have posted that link yourself when you introduced your idea because let's face it, you didn't do very good job at presenting it.
It's not like I'm marketing the idea. I don't feel an obligation to sell it, certainly not to people who're not open to it.

Also, The Venus Project is not my idea - it just happens to look very much like it.

I don't like forcing ideas on people - and I'm not a salesman. Also, I wouldn't want people who can't think for themselves too interested. That's probably where I diverge a bit from TVP - because they have a very different approach to how it's supposed to happen.

The idea of The venus Project is interesting but it still remains very idealistic and I am not convinced about the feasibility and long term sustainability. Also, the technological investment to achieve this would take decades, at least.
No one can accurately estimate how long it will take at this point. I say years - because I believe it will be years. But you might be surprised how much can be achieved in a short time - if the effort is put forth and focused.

Consider what happened during WW2, for instance.

There was one particular comment that the "inventor" of the idea said that struck me as crucial. He says that for the system to work, people need to be challenged in order for them to pursue goals. Of course, it is easier said than done as he didn't provide methods to achieve that, at least not in the video. This is exactly one of the things that I was criticising about your model. The technologocial stagnation and the encouragement of work.
I'm not really going to argue on the part of the Venus Project. Again, it's not mine - and I'm not Jacque Fresco. I admire the guy, and he's obviously a very smart man - but he's not me. I can't speak for him.

But I do believe it's basic psychology that people stagnate and become complacent without challenge - but it doesn't have to be society that challenges them. There is such a thing as personal responsibility. I just want to help us in any way it's possible.

The project assumes the availability and efficient distribution of resources in such a way that everyone will have access to whatever they like. But I think that there is one serious flaw. When basic needs are met, people will turn towards secondary needs and there will always be certain goods that are scarce, this is just inevitable. To take a simple example, a finely handcrafted violin able to reproduce extraordinary sound or a 30 year old high quality wine. You will have a hard time convincing me that people will eventually not start competing over certain goods and/or services. And once you get there, things may follow a different path as previously intended.
Again, that's TVP. I don't propose we have access to everything we like - but I do think "what we like" will change significantly. Prestige, rank, value, class and so on will be gone - so a lot of the "fake" appeals of these things go away.

One thing that the video doesn't talk about is the human psychologal side and they do not make assumptions about human nature in the same way that you do. So I assume that that is your partcular contribution to this concept .
My primary interest in life is human psychology, so that's what I tend to operate from. Unlike Jacque Fresco - I don't have a background in engineering - and I don't know much about how such things work in detail. But you must remember that I didn't hear about TVP or Jacque until 2009. I started thinking about this when I was 16-17 years old - 20 years ago.

You still owe me an answer to a question that I asked you some time ago that you never bothered to answer.
Mind repeating it?
Last edited by DArtagnan; November 23rd, 2012 at 09:50.
DArtagnan is offline

DArtagnan

DArtagnan's Avatar
Waste of potential

#65

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Denmark
Posts: 13,939

Default 

November 23rd, 2012, 09:34
Originally Posted by badmofo View Post
If it's not too personal a question DArtagnan - what's your day job? You obviously have a very different view of humanity - and the things they're collectively capable of - than what I do.
Promise me that you don't confuse what people do in their day job - with their interests or capacity.

That said, if you want to know - I work as an "Incident Manager/Technician" in the "Printservergroup" for the combined IT support branch of the "Kommune of Copenhagen" (sort of like a county/region - the largest in Denmark).

And that's just humans for ya'. They'll get away with whatever they can. We're not capable of a Utopian society because at the end of the day someone is always gonna block the toilet and ruin it for everyone.
I'm not suggesting a utopian society. What you would consider utopian is a joke when you ask the next generation of Utopia. However, people behave according to what they learn and experience. You can't change their nature - but you can change their behavior.

If you showed a good example of the western world (like Sweden) to a caveman - he would probably consider it utopian, don't you think?
DArtagnan is offline

DArtagnan

DArtagnan's Avatar
Waste of potential

#66

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Denmark
Posts: 13,939

Default 

November 23rd, 2012, 09:36
Originally Posted by DeepO View Post
that said,

That´s more-or-less why the novel approach came to mind.
Because I think you (or anyone, really) can hardly "sell" this kind of ideas via dry, clinical, or or papers.
Starting with "out there" setting (like, for example, contemporaneity, harrharr) and then slowly converging into the vision of yours might be the way to go.
I mean, some bits may stick, dialectix and all .
I don't want to sell it. I want to talk about it.

I don't want people who can't understand or appreciate it to "buy it" - because they'd twist it or manipulate it.

I want people who're genuinely interested in it to read it - and THEN talk to others about it - trying perhaps to educate or inform.

You can't communicate things like this without a very open and rational mind on the receiving end.
DArtagnan is offline

DArtagnan

DArtagnan's Avatar
Waste of potential

#67

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Denmark
Posts: 13,939

Default 

November 23rd, 2012, 12:38
Definitely fair enough .

What you think about most, is what you become.
DeepO is offline

DeepO

DeepO's Avatar
deep outside

#68

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Prague
Posts: 2,285

Default 

November 23rd, 2012, 15:56
Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
… I'm not a salesman.
Somehow, that does not surprise me .

Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
No one can accurately estimate how long it will take at this point. I say years - because I believe it will be years.
Years? …No way!!

Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
But you might be surprised how much can be achieved in a short time - if the effort is put forth and focused.

Consider what happened during WW2, for instance.
It is indeed known that WW2 led to the development of many technologies but for a very simple reason,….there was a huge motivator.

You cannot compare the conditions of "survival during war" where everything is at stake and the "comforts of peace" in terms of urgency and drive for development.
Isn't there this famous saying "necessity is the mother of invention"?

People need to have the proper motivation and focus in order for them to work hard to achieve the desired goals. This is something that I criticised in your model since this crucial element is lacking IMO. If I understand your view of human nature in such a world correctly, you will then propably say that people will do so out of a sense of responsibility and a desire to give to the community. But if so, then I consider you guilty of putting too much faith in humanity.

Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
But I do believe it's basic psychology that people stagnate and become complacent without challenge - but it doesn't have to be society that challenges them. There is such a thing as personal responsibility. I just want to help us in any way it's possible.
See above. You claim that motivations coming from the "interior" are sufficient but I think that is a very fragile basis to guarantee a long term union. I would rather focus on providing a proper exterior motivation.

Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
but I do think "what we like" will change significantly.
What makes you so sure about that?

Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
Prestige, rank, value, class and so on will be gone - so a lot of the "fake" appeals of these things go away.
I assume that even in your world certain individuals will still be admired for their particular achievements. Wouldn't that alone lead to some form of "perceived rank" among the people?

Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
Mind repeating it?
It was about your avatar. I mean, what the hell is it?
Asdraguuhl is offline

Asdraguuhl

Asdraguuhl's Avatar
Sentinel

#69

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Madrid, Spain
Posts: 392

Default 

November 23rd, 2012, 16:02
Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
You can't communicate things like this without a very open and rational mind on the receiving end.
It goes both ways. One cannot put demands on the receiver if the emitter is malfunctioning. (There is little point in receiving something well if it is sent badly).
Asdraguuhl is offline

Asdraguuhl

Asdraguuhl's Avatar
Sentinel

#70

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Madrid, Spain
Posts: 392

Default 

November 23rd, 2012, 16:40
Originally Posted by Asdraguuhl View Post
]You cannot compare the conditions of "survival during war" where everything is at stake and the "comforts of peace" in terms of urgency and drive for development. Isn't there this famous saying "necessity is the mother of invention"?
You can compare anything, but that doesn't mean it has to be a fair comparison.

What I did, however, was not a comparison - it was an example of how things can be sped up through certain conditions.

Actually, TVP concept is that it's going to happen after the current world society collapses - and in such a scenario - I don't think the WW2 is a bad example of similar circumstances. In fact, I think it might be a much stronger motivator.

However, for my own concept - it would depend on the motivation on the team that was assigned to research, plan and implement. It would not be about making money - so I can imagine some passionate people being highly motivated.

People need to have the proper motivation and focus in order for them to work hard to achieve the desired goals. This is something that I criticised in your model since this crucial element is lacking IMO. If I understand your view of human nature in such a world correctly, you will then propably say that people will do so out of a sense of responsibility and a desire to give to the community. But if so, then I consider you guilty of putting too much faith in humanity.
I did say personal responsibility - but that's just one aspect of why you evolve yourself. I think it's a human trait to WANT to evolve and grow, it's just not particularly easy in our current society.

I think people would be a LOT more productive if they could do basically what they wanted to do without being told they're wrong or deviants - but that doesn't go for all people. But the people who'd be likely to voluntarily join a project like this - especially in the early stages (where there'd be a LOT of work involved) - would be much more likely to contribute.

See above. You claim that motivations coming from the "interior" are sufficient but I think that is a very fragile basis to guarantee a long term union. I would rather focus on providing a proper exterior motivation.
Where have I claimed interior motivators are sufficient? I just said that society doesn't HAVE to be the only motivator.

What makes you so sure about that?
That's because I think a lot of what people place a higher value on today, is based on a society with excessive resource scarcity. We value rare things - because they represent the "kind of thing" we can't get our hands on. Especially when we know that there are people starving and dying due to not having access to even the most basic of needs.

For instance, I don't think it's human nature to consider a really fancy car worth a thousand times more than a cheap car - despite the fact that they both share the exact same basic functions. I think that's based on conditioning and false values.

I assume that even in your world certain individuals will still be admired for their particular achievements. Wouldn't that alone lead to some form of "perceived rank" among the people?
For this world to work, we have to understand that all human beings are born equal - and that they're not in control of their early development which shapes them. If someone is born smart - then it's not because he made himself smart. So, why should we admire him? If a woman is born beautiful - then is she more worthy of admiration? It's not like she created herself, is it?

This whole concept of admiration and idolatry is based on irrational perceptions. I consider it a very harmful disease of the modern world society.

People should not accomplish or achieve because they want admiration. They should do so because they want to improve the world for everyone.

That is the very foundation of the society - and the very reason resources should be distributed evenly.

It was about your avatar. I mean, what the hell is it?
Ah, that's my dog Balder - chilling in his basket
DArtagnan is offline

DArtagnan

DArtagnan's Avatar
Waste of potential

#71

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Denmark
Posts: 13,939

Default 

November 23rd, 2012, 16:43
Originally Posted by Asdraguuhl View Post
It goes both ways. One cannot put demands on the receiver if the emitter is malfunctioning. (There is little point in receiving something well if it is sent badly).
Which is why I'm not putting demands on the receiver. That is a key area where Jacque Fresco and I differ in our approach to this concept of an alternate society. He wants to reach everyone - and I don't. Well, I'd like to - but I know it's not possible to do it in that way. Maybe I don't have the stamina - but I'd rather focus on "targeted" information.

Reason being that I'd rather not wait for the current world society to collapse - and I'm not convinced that it will, not at all. I'd prefer trying to create a separate world society - and teach through demonstration.
DArtagnan is offline

DArtagnan

DArtagnan's Avatar
Waste of potential

#72

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Denmark
Posts: 13,939

Default 

November 23rd, 2012, 17:44
Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
However, for my own concept - it would depend on the motivation on the team that was assigned to research, plan and implement. It would not be about making money - so I can imagine some passionate people being highly motivated.

But the people who'd be likely to voluntarily join a project like this - especially in the early stages (where there'd be a LOT of work involved) - would be much more likely to contribute.
I agree with you that a group of people passionate about such project would be able to achieve very good results. However, when everything is finished and working well, there will come a time where future generations will consider their living conditions to be the default state and will take things for granted. I think that the danger lies there. How will you motivate them?

Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
For instance, I don't think it's human nature to consider a really fancy car worth a thousand times more than a cheap car - despite the fact that they both share the exact same basic functions. I think that's based on conditioning and false values.
The fancy car itself doesn't have the value. Unless you are a legitimate car aficionado, it is mainly to show the world that you were able to afford that car and showing off your status.

An interesting thing is the concept of beauty. Today, travelling is very common but it wasn't 20 years ago. I remember when I was living in the Netherlands, when summer holidays finished, that people were proudly walking around with a tan after returning from a sunny country. After all, a pale look was considered less attractive. The funny thing is that prior to the industrial revolution, a pale skin was the beauty standard. The reason is simply a matter of power. Before the industrial revolution, the labourers, i.e. lower classes, worked outside in the fields under the Sun whereas the higher class remained more time inside thus looking pale in comparison as a result. Being pale meant that you belonged to a higher class and that was considered attractive. After the industrial revolution, labourers worked all day inside whereas the rich had spare time to spend outside. Things "switched" and labourers got pale and a tan was considered attractive.
So, returning to my holiday example, having a tan simply meant that you were wealthy enough to go on holidays.

My point is that this perceived value may indeed look subjective and relative but can be the result of aspects of human nature, which in this particular case is the perception of power and status in society.

Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
For this world to work, we have to understand that all human beings are born equal - and that they're not in control of their early development which shapes them. If someone is born smart - then it's not because he made himself smart. So, why should we admire him? If a woman is born beautiful - then is she more worthy of admiration? It's not like she created herself, is it?

This whole concept of admiration and idolatry is based on irrational perceptions. I consider it a very harmful disease of the modern world society.

People should not accomplish or achieve because they want admiration. They should do so because they want to improve the world for everyone.
I disagree. I do believe that the lack of recognition is very demotivating. (There is a difference between idolatry and recognition).

Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
Ah, that's my dog Balder - chilling in his basket
OK, now I see. One mistery less .
Asdraguuhl is offline

Asdraguuhl

Asdraguuhl's Avatar
Sentinel

#73

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Madrid, Spain
Posts: 392

Default 

November 23rd, 2012, 17:57
Originally Posted by Asdraguuhl View Post
I agree with you that a group of people passionate about such project would be able to achieve very good results. However, when everything is finished and working well, there will come a time where future generations will consider their living conditions to be the default state and will take things for granted. I think that the danger lies there. How will you motivate them?
I believe I've answered that. I believe that people are naturally motivated to evolve - and because they have basic needs met and can live in comfort - I don't think they cease to want to evolve and improve themselves and their surroundings. I think motivation comes from within and from without - and that won't change.

I don't think people enjoy being bored and sitting around all day. Certainly, a lot won't accept life if it's nothing but sitting down - and there's no reason it would be.

Again, this isn't Wall-E where AIs control everything and wipes your chin.

Apparently, that's what you don't believe.

But even if they somehow all stopped evolving - it would still be an infinitely better society than what we have today, if you ask me. I'd rather have everyone living in complacency and comfort - than having so many millions of people suffering and dying.

The fancy car itself doesn't have the value. Unless you are a legitimate car aficionado, it is mainly to show the world that you were able to afford that car and showing off your status.
Precisely.

An interesting thing is the concept of beauty. Today, travelling is very common but it wasn't 20 years ago. I remember when I was living in the Netherlands, when summer holidays finished, that people were proudly walking around with a tan after returning from a sunny country. After all, a pale look was considered less attractive. The funny thing is that prior to the industrial revolution, a pale skin was the beauty standard. The reason is simply a matter of power. Before the industrial evolution, the labourers, i.e. lower classes, worked outside in the fields under the Sun whereas the higher class remained more time inside thus looking pale in comparison as a result. Being pale meant that you belonged to a higher class and that was considered attractive. After the industrial revolution, labourers worked all day inside whereas the rich had spare time to spent outside. Things "switched" and labourers got pale and a tan was considered attractive.
So, returning to my holiday example, having a tan simply meant that you were wealthy enough to go on holidays.
Well, I think beauty is much more than that - but I agree it can be an aspect of beauty.

We have no indisputable evidence to establish how much beauty is about evolution/genetics - and how much it's about cultural significance. We can but guess. We don't even know if it can be determined at all - or if there are relevant factors that have nothing to do with the above.

But you're failing to address my questions. Why should we admire the people I mentioned?

My point is that this perceived value may indeed look subjective and relative but can be the result of aspects of human nature, which in this particular case is the perception of power and status in society.
Precisely. You're agreeing with me on purpose?

I disagree. I do believe that the lack of recognition is very demotivating. (There is a difference between idolatry and recognition).
Most people do - and most people don't agree with me about all being equal. But I don't believe recognition is a natural requirement for contribution - I think that's very much a conditioned trait - based on our current society and the obsession with class/power/rank/wealth and so forth.

But you're moving away from the word you used before = admiration, and subsequent ranks. I don't think there's anything wrong with recognition - I just don't think it's a larger motivator from nature than wanting to make things better or to evolve.
DArtagnan is offline

DArtagnan

DArtagnan's Avatar
Waste of potential

#74

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Denmark
Posts: 13,939

Default 

November 23rd, 2012, 21:07
About cars:

I disagree with you DA.

I would not call myself a car aficionado. I barely know ten models of cars. I have however driven in five different cars for long periods of times. I can easily say that some more expensive cars are much better to drie in.

The basic function of driving is the same, but I'd you drive for more than 30 minutes somewhere you don't want to end up with a bum that hurts or AC/heating that malfunctions.

I drove my father's Saab, which I found to be the most comfortable of cars I've driven. Seats are very comfortable, and driving to the uk or Germany with the Saab was even pleasurable.

I've driven a Nissan micra in Australia and while it did drive, it was quite a pain. It couldn't manage to go faster than 50km per hour on hills and the seats were not very comfortable. A week in that car compared to the Saab was hellish.

I drove a Chevrolet I think ( the one with the slanted cross) in south Africa, which was quite comfortable, but made so much noise it was worse than the people honking their horns all the time in joburg.

I drove a VW polo in the south of France. It was quite comfortable, but it was also quite troublesome to drive with it in the hilly terrain.

So, yes, they all drive, and of you are only going to drive for 10 minutes a day, ten I would agree with you, but any long trip really changed that.

Hope I made sense.
Pladio is online now

Pladio

Pladio's Avatar
Guardian of Nonsense
RPGWatch Donor

#75

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: London, uk
Posts: 3,038
Send a message via MSN to Pladio

Default 

November 24th, 2012, 16:23
Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
Again, this isn't Wall-E where AIs control everything and wipes your chin.
I haven't seen Wall-E so I cannot comment on it.

Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
I'd rather have everyone living in complacency and comfort - than having so many millions of people suffering and dying.
Yes, but that is is not what is being disputed but rather the feasibility and sustainability.

Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
But you're failing to address my questions. Why should we admire the people I mentioned?
You mention traits of people that they are born with and I agree that there is no reason to admire someone only for being born in a certain way. However, I don't think admiration is solely aimed at these specific traits but more at the achievements that are obtained through dedicated effort. Generally speaking, someone born with a higher than average intelligence still needs to work hard in order to produce any scientific advancements. Someone born with an artistic skill still needs to practice a lot during life.

I would say that admiration, recognition, appreciation or whatever you want to call it, based on effort and achievements is not inherently bad and I would even say that it is beneficial as it encourages people to be more dedicated in achieving their goals.


Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
Precisely. You're agreeing with me on purpose?
You should by now know me better than that .

Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
But I don't believe recognition is a natural requirement for contribution - I think that's very much a conditioned trait - based on our current society and the obsession with class/power/rank/wealth and so forth.
I disagree here. Recognition and appreciation is very important IMO. I am not necessarily talking about idolatry or climbing up the social ladder but more about every day ocurrences like e.g. complimenting someone at work for a job well done.

Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
I don't think there's anything wrong with recognition - I just don't think it's a larger motivator from nature than wanting to make things better or to evolve.
I would say that "wanting to make things better" stems from idealism rather than recognition. Can you guarantee a persistent sense of idealism in your concept of society?
Asdraguuhl is offline

Asdraguuhl

Asdraguuhl's Avatar
Sentinel

#76

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Madrid, Spain
Posts: 392

Default 

November 24th, 2012, 18:28
I just wanted to point out that there is no University of Berkeley (that I know of). Its UC Berkeley, part of the University of California system that includes UCLA, etc. In NCAA tournaments when they talk about a team called "California" this is the team. This is the city that banned gas stations but have a prominent Alfa Romero/Mercedes/Lamborghini dealership right off the Freeway.

Developer of The Wizard's Grave Android game. Discussion Thread:
http://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/showthread.php?t=22520
Lucky Day is offline

Lucky Day

Lucky Day's Avatar
Daywatch

#77

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: The Uncanny Valley
Posts: 3,177

Default 

November 24th, 2012, 21:37
Yes, but that is is not what is being disputed but rather the feasibility and sustainability.
You're questioning whether people will want to evolve and improve things - and that's a separate issue from being able to sustain a highly automated societal structure. Are you also questioning whether people can perform the basic functions to keep this society going once it's been established?

If that is the case, you REALLY don't think much of people.

You mention traits of people that they are born with and I agree that there is no reason to admire someone only for being born in a certain way. However, I don't think admiration is solely aimed at these specific traits but more at the achievements that are obtained through dedicated effort. Generally speaking, someone born with a higher than average intelligence still needs to work hard in order to produce any scientific advancements. Someone born with an artistic skill still needs to practice a lot during life.
Yes, but you don't know whether the results of that hard work is primarily because of the work itself or the fortunate combination of having a higher intelligence
and having found the right place for utilising it. You also don't know whether that demanded more from that person - than the demands being placed on the average person in an average job. How could you know?

So, even without this knowledge - people go around admiring achievements that seem unique - and they hardly ever think about the "common people" in common jobs - because it doesn't seem so special

I contend that's a disease based on false values.

If there is such a thing as a genius - and I don't personally think there is in the true sense of the word - then the expectation would be that he or she would do more with that gift. So, why would we admire someone that's been born so gifted because he achieves more? That's stupid.

You may believe you can accurately gauge how much effort went into the results of hard work by any given person - but I think that's basically impossible. The amount of factors that contribute to how a person evolves from birth to adulthood is completely beyond our capacity to fully grasp and understand. That's why you can never really know how impressive a human feat really is. You just can't.

I would say that admiration, recognition, appreciation or whatever you want to call it, based on effort and achievements is not inherently bad and I would even say that it is beneficial as it encourages people to be more dedicated in achieving their goals.
I'm not saying it's inherently bad - but that it's not a good primary motivator. As a secondary motivator - it's fine, even good at times. I just think it's a very unfortunate drive in the vast majority of people who're seeking to achieve.

If we make admiration important, we're basically agreeing to be irrational - and we're risking that people are motivated for reasons that have nothing to do with actually improving the world. The goal of being admired should never be the primary motivator.

It's a tainted and harmful aspiration to be recognised or admired - if you focus on it.

Why? Think Paris Hilton.

You should by now know me better than that .
Yeah, it does seem odd.

I disagree here. Recognition and appreciation is very important IMO. I am not necessarily talking about idolatry or climbing up the social ladder but more about every day ocurrences like e.g. complimenting someone at work for a job well done.
Yes, it's very important today in our society - with our values. I'm not disputing that. Well, it means next to nothing to some people (like myself) - but we're the exceptions.

I would say that "wanting to make things better" stems from idealism rather than recognition. Can you guarantee a persistent sense of idealism in your concept of society?
I have no idea what you're talking about. I don't agree that wanting to evolve and improve things is about idealism. I believe it's a natural state for human beings - though it doesn't necessarily lead to any action or actual positive outcome. I believe people universally want to improve and help each other - but there are many, many things that can get in the way of that basic drive. I aim to minimise the amount of factors that get in the way.
DArtagnan is offline

DArtagnan

DArtagnan's Avatar
Waste of potential

#78

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Denmark
Posts: 13,939

Default 

November 24th, 2012, 21:58
Anyway… I think we've kinda reached an impasse. We're going in circles a bit - and you obviously don't believe that this society can function without certain external motivators and what not.

If we go on, we'll soon end up going "I think so." - "I don't." over and over - which I'm sure you'll agree is silly.

So, I suggest we agree to disagree - and I thank you for an interesting exchange. I find that it's extremely rare that people bother asking relevant and curious questions about this - and you even seem to have heard some of my answers.

Most people don't really ask anything because of curiosity, they go straight to ridicule and how all the ideas have been tried a million times before (communism being the most famously ignorant comparison), and so on.

So, it's been pleasant
DArtagnan is offline

DArtagnan

DArtagnan's Avatar
Waste of potential

#79

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Denmark
Posts: 13,939

Default 

November 24th, 2012, 22:04
Originally Posted by DArtagnan View Post
Anyway… I think we've kinda reached an impasse. We're going in circles a bit - and you obviously don't believe that this society can function without certain external motivators and what not.

If we go on, we'll soon end up going "I think so." - "I don't." over and over - which I'm sure you'll agree is silly.

So, I suggest we agree to disagree - and I thank you for an interesting exchange. I find that it's extremely rare that people bother asking relevant questions about this - and you even seem to have heard some of my answers. So, that's always pleasant
Agreed. Now, we just need to find a sunny terrace and drink a nice cool beer to celebrate this peaceful resolution to an online debate .
Asdraguuhl is offline

Asdraguuhl

Asdraguuhl's Avatar
Sentinel

#80

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Madrid, Spain
Posts: 392
RPGWatch Forums » General Forums » Politics & Religion » University of Berkeley : Rich people have a greater tendency towards greed
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT +2. The time now is 17:59.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright by RPGWatch