Why should I care

[RoyBatty]

I'm not opposed to taxation in principle, at least insofar as it benefits a very large proportion of the country. This would include public health and education up to and including the postsecondary level

And of course everyone has certain rights

However, I'm opposed to several of the driving sentiments behind the left in general: that everyone is special and important in his or her own right, and that most of the world's problems are caused by a handful of fat, mustache-twirling grinches with monocles, silk hats and gold pocket watches

Personally I think most people are chodes, in general

Yes, there are some real pricks at the tippy-top of the capitalist pyramid scheme

But who is playing along with this scheme?

You could argue that social engineering is being carried out at a massive scale, and I agree, but don't the sheep shoulder a large amount of the blame for getting suckered into it?

Wouldn't a lot of the ills you guys decry go away if the average person stopped liking them so much?

Finally, why should the individualists in society, the smart people, the freethinkers, have to pay an undue tribute to everyone else?

[Demogorgon]

Finally, why should the individualists in society, the smart people, the freethinkers, have to pay an undue tribute to everyone else?
The question of what category you think you fit into and why says an awful lot about this kind of argument.

[RoyBatty]

The question of what category you think you fit into and why says an awful lot about this kind of argument.

Here are some reasons why I fit into the non-chode category:



I examine claims critically and try to be very aware of cognitive biases
I do not attempt to impose my values on other people in cases where no one could be immediately harmed, though I might argue against theirs
I do not simply pay lip service to causes I claim to support, but get involved
I aim to contribute to everything I partake in



If everyone did things like this, the world would be better off. Don't pretend the current apathetic society of chodes would be able to compete

[Misanthrope]

Finally, why should the individualists in society, the smart people, the freethinkers, have to pay an undue tribute to everyone else?

Although your view of socialism/communism is completely warped and flat out wrong. Why do you get to decide that taxation is just but "the individualists have to pay an undue tribute" is unjust? Whatever that statement means..

[Plagueround]

Here are some reasons why I fit into the non-chode category:



I examine claims critically and try to be very aware of cognitive biases
I do not attempt to impose my values on other people in cases where no one could be immediately harmed, though I might argue against theirs
I do not simply pay lip service to causes I claim to support, but get involved
I aim to contribute to everything I partake in



If everyone did things like this, the world would be better off. Don't pretend the current apathetic society of chodes would be able to compete

The fact that you would claim to examine things critically, but fail to see the sociological conditions that influence and to an extent determine people's place in society, instead lazily labeling and writing off the majority as "chodes", says a lot more about you than any self-described qualities you think you possess.

[Demogorgon]

Well there is your answer really. The political philosophy you proclaim is just self-flattery. All these philosophies about there being an inequality of people, with some superior to others inevitably come down to the people pushing them seeking to convince themselves or others that they are the part of the elite.

So should you care? Well that is up to you really, but in turn why should we care for your narcissism?

[RoyBatty]

Although your view of socialism/communism is completely warped and flat out wrong. Why do you get to decide that taxation is just but "the individualists have to pay an undue tribute" is unjust? Whatever that statement means..

I guess it was kind of vague

I would define "undue" as "paying for governmental services that couldn't potentially benefit everyone"


The fact that you would claim to examine things critically, but fail to see the sociological conditions that influence and to an extent determine people's place in society, instead lazily labeling and writing off the majority as "chodes", says a lot more about you than any self-described qualities you think you possess.

I grew up in a poor neighborhood myself. But I didn't take up drugs, petty theft and vandalism. I tried very hard to improve my situation and got out of there. I really don't care for totally spineless people who let their peers and environment decide everything they do

Also, the estimation of a person as a "chode" is not entirely objective at all. To a large extent, the reasoning methods that you would apply to claims of (for example) psychic phenomena and UFOs don't apply here


So should you care? Well that is up to you really, but in turn why should we care for your narcissism?

Because it doesn't seem that any of you are the kind of people who are really going to have any influence in the world, now or in the future

[Bud Struggle]

I'm not opposed to taxation in principle, at least insofar as it benefits a very large proportion of the country. This would include public health and education up to and including the postsecondary level Well universal education helps everyone--it's nice that it helps individuals, but it's main object is to advance society in general. Public health--that also helps the public in general, on the other hand private health plans payed for by the public is simething else all thgether.


And of course everyone has certain rights And those would be "natural" or made by agreement?


However, I'm opposed to several of the driving sentiments behind the left in general: that everyone is special and important in his or her own right, What makes people "special" is arbitrary, it always has been--what the Communists seek to do us even out the playing field so everyone is equally "special" from the get to. What they do what that specialness is then their responsibility.


and that most of the world's problems are caused by a handful of fat, mustache-twirling grinches with monocles, silk hats and gold pocket watches The Communist DO have their bogeyman and just as soon as we get rid of him the birds will sing and the lion will sleep with the lamb.


Personally I think most people are chodes, in general I don't know--they can be if they so choose--but in general people if left to their own resources can be pretty decent in general. You tend to be a bit elitist.


You could argue that social engineering is being carried out at a massive scale, and I agree, but don't the sheep shoulder a large amount of the blame for getting suckered into it? that may be, but in the USA at least most people have a decent living and do fairly well.


Finally, why should the individualists in society, the smart people, the freethinkers, have to pay an undue tribute to everyone else? Well right now it's quite the other way around, isn't it?

[Dr Mindbender]

Finally, why should the individualists in society, the smart people, the freethinkers, have to pay an undue tribute to everyone else?

Your post implies that all smart people and freethinkers are not burdened by the system of wage slavery.

Case in point.
http://i47.photobucket.com/albums/f166/bones2jack/Paris%20Hilton/ParisHilton_Caulfield_8572072.jpg

[Misanthrope]

I guess it was kind of vague

I would define "undue" as "paying for governmental services that couldn't potentially benefit everyone"


So basically, taxation.

[RoyBatty]

Your post implies that all smart people and freethinkers are not burdened by the system of wage slavery.

Case in point.

[image of Paris Hilton]

Generally speaking, a person who fiercely resists the influence of the mainstream (and these are typically smart or very smart people) can eventually find some kind of niche where they are saved from drudgery to a large extent or entirely

As long as we are talking about celebrities, I'd like to use the example of "Joe the Plumber," a prominent figure in the recent McCain presidential campaign. His name is not really Joe; he's not really a licensed plumber; he talks extemporaneously about things he has no understanding of at all. In short he is a chode, and will probably always be a chode. Why should I really care about people like him? (And there are a lot of them, really.)


So basically, taxation.

No, just things like abuse of Medicaid/Medicare and programs that really only benefit bottomfeeders

btw, I'm curious about how physics will change after time is abolished

[Skooma Addict]

Well there is your answer really. The political philosophy you proclaim is just self-flattery. All these philosophies about there being an inequality of people, with some superior to others inevitably come down to the people pushing them seeking to convince themselves or others that they are the part of the elite.

I know what kind of people your talking about. People like this will tend to find something they are good at, and then claim that since they are good at such and such, they are part of some kind of elite. People like that annoy me so much....

I don't know if they actually sincerely believe they are part of some elite however. I think they are just desperate and want to believe they are superior to others. But whatever, they are usually just morons anyways.

[Dr Mindbender]

Generally speaking, a person who fiercely resists the influence of the mainstream (and these are typically smart or very smart people) can eventually find some kind of niche where they are saved from drudgery to a large extent or entirely

The niche's you speak of sustain the status quo, many 'smart' people choose not to exploit these niches not necessarilly out of lack of intelligence or eptitude, but of principle.



As long as we are talking about celebrities, I'd like to use the example of "Joe the Plumber," a prominent figure in the recent McCain presidential campaign. His name is not really Joe; he's not really a licensed plumber; he talks extemporaneously about things he has no understanding of at all. In short he is a chode, and will probably always be a chode. Why should I really care about people like him? (And there are a lot of them, really.)
If your toilet starts shooting sludge, or your sink taps fail to work im sure old joe will start to creep up your 'cool list'.



No, just things like abuse of Medicaid/Medicare and programs that really only benefit bottomfeeders.

well if you think about it, these also benefit businesses (ie. employers) because they prevent their staff getting sick, costing them money.

[RoyBatty]

The niche's you speak of sustain the status quo, many 'smart' people choose not to exploit these niches not necessarilly out of lack of intelligence or eptitude, but of principle.

Well, would you say that my intended career path (neuroscientist) is about "maintaining the status quo"?

I would disagree strongly. Neuroscience and other scientific fields are set to overturn the status quo entirely. (See the second part of my signature)


If your toilet starts shooting sludge, or your sink taps fail to work im sure old joe will start to creep up your 'cool list'.

The guy isn't a real plumber. I'd rather hire a licensed plumber if I were unable to fix the issue myself


well if you think about it, these also benefit businesses (ie. employers) because they prevent their staff getting sick, costing them money.

I said "abuse," not "legitimate use"

Also some government programs are just kind of a drag

[Dr Mindbender]

Well, would you say that my intended career path (neuroscientist) is about "maintaining the status quo"?
No, because there will still be neuroscientists post capitalism.

Roles which are orientated around the paradigm of scarcity planning and mantaining the existance of scarcity are also directly responsible for mantaining the status quo. This could include bankers, politicians, venture capitalists, or members of the parasitic industries like insurance brokers and debt collectors.



The guy isn't a real plumber. I'd rather hire a licensed plumber if I were unable to fix the issue myself
Doesnt a 'licensed plumber' come under the umbrella of worker, ie the personification that joe represents?

[Jimmie Higgins]

Were there more "chodes" in feudal societies? Did the "smart people" farm turnips really hard until one day, they finally became noblemen?

No one would look at feudal society in this way because we can see from a distance the kinds of social structures and systems that were employed by the rulers of those societies to convince the poor that God decided they were not awesome enough to be aristocrats.

While capitalism obviously does have more social mobility (up and down) than feudalism, it is equally silly to think of the structure of society in terms of "smart-people" and "chodes". Essentially your view that capitalist society "naturally" divides the mice from men, is not an understanding of how society works but is just an excuse for the status quo and not too much different than feudal bishops that argued that if you are poor it is because God wanted it to be that way.

[Dr Mindbender]

...plus it completely fails to acknowledge the nepotism that is rife within capitalism that rewards people for absolutely nothing other than having the right friends.

[RoyBatty]

No, because there will still be neuroscientists post capitalism.

Ok, so you admit my way of spurning the mainstream doesn't uphold the status quo


Roles which are orientated around the paradigm of scarcity planning and mantaining the existance of scarcity are also directly responsible for mantaining the status quo

One could argue that scarcity is inevitable

It definitely is inevitable with 6.77 billion people on Earth


Doesnt a 'licensed plumber' come under the umbrella of worker, ie the personification that joe represents?

No. That's what's funny about him. (Actually, that's one of many funny things about him.)

[RoyBatty]

Were there more "chodes" in feudal societies? Did the "smart people" farm turnips really hard until one day, they finally became noblemen?

Well, no, Europe was eventually gifted with the Black Death and then social mobility started to happen to a much greater degree


While capitalism obviously does have more social mobility (up and down) than feudalism, it is equally silly to think of the structure of society in terms of "smart-people" and "chodes". Essentially your view that capitalist society "naturally" divides the mice from men, is not an understanding of how society works but is just an excuse for the status quo and not too much different than feudal bishops that argued that if you are poor it is because God wanted it to be that way.

I am in favor of what most US Americans would call "socialism," but opposed to a lot of the overweening sentimentality and rose-colored worldview of many leftists


...plus it completely fails to acknowledge the nepotism that is rife within capitalism that rewards people for absolutely nothing other than having the right friends.

That does suck. It is hard to conceive of superior (feasible) alternatives right now though.

I would add that nepotism is an issue with any society. This is a human issue, not a strictly economic issue.

[Dr Mindbender]

Ok, so you admit my way of spurning the mainstream doesn't uphold the status quo

I dont inherently beleive that people choose to become skilled professionals to spite everyone, no; what i observe is that the 'mainstream' as you view them, see such goals as unacheivable, purely because of the activities of individuals such as who i listed.




One could argue that scarcity is inevitable
It's hardly inevitable when we have one nation alone that could produce enough grain to feed a population treble that of the world. Those with most power over our media and industries have defined our culture and encouraged us to believe it inevitable because it is in their self interests to do so.



It definitely is inevitable with 6.77 billion people on Earth
Again, a false dichotomy that we must choose between sustanance and abundancy. We currently have scarcity inspite of abundancy and it is the price system that allows this to continue.




No. That's what's funny about him. (Actually, that's one of many funny things about him.)
Obviously this is a coloquial euphanism that im not used to.

I'm Northern European so i apologise if i'm slow on the uptake.

[RoyBatty]

I dont inherently beleive that people choose to become skilled professionals to spite everyone, no

Well I love neuroscience, to the extent that I read about neurobiology and whatnot above and beyond my current academic requirements, but I have to say I definitely want to piss on all the burnouts I grew up with


what i observe is that the 'mainstream' as you view them, see such goals as unacheivable, purely because of the activities of individuals such as who i listed

huh?


It's hardly inevitable when we have one nation alone that could produce enough grain to feed a population treble that of the world.

Which one?

How can all this grain be distributed?

Does man "live by bread alone"?


Again, a false dichotomy that we must choose between sustanance and abundancy. We currently have scarcity inspite of abundancy and it is the price system that allows this to continue.

Can you give evidence for this claim?


Obviously this is a coloquial euphanism that im not used to.

"'Joe the Plumber' is not a licensed plumber" is not overly colloquial


I'm Northern European so i apologise if i'm slow on the uptake.

What is your native language?

Är ditt modersmål svenska?

[Dr Mindbender]

Well I love neuroscience, to the extent that I read about neurobiology and whatnot above and beyond my current academic requirements, but I have to say I definitely want to piss on all the burnouts I grew up with
Your desire to 'piss on burnouts' is irrelevant to your desire to further science. Professionals have a desire to contribute to their chosen industry rather than solely pursue financial gain, financial sector professionals are solely interested in financial gain. Otherwise, why wouldnt we all try to become CEO's considering the vastly greater difference in reward and less pressure in terms of learning a complicated science?

Although your contempt for your fellow man does make me question your motives for going into medicine. I hope for the sake of 'the burnouts' you speak of they never have to come to you for treatment.




huh?

See previous post...

...ah nvm.




Which one?

I'll give you one guess.



How can all this grain be distributed?
The offending nation in question is doing a grand job of distributing its munitions, i dont see why grain takes such a leap in imagination.


Does man "live by bread alone"?
Go to a country afflicted by famine with a truckload of bread and i'll doubt you'll get many complaints about a lack of marmite or tuna paste.



Can you give evidence for this claim?

read the Forbes 100.




"'Joe the Plumber' is not a licensed plumber" is not overly colloquial



What is your native language?

Är ditt modersmål svenska?

Not that far north.

I was being partly facetious, im rather tired and couldnt be bothered to analyse the last point of your post.

[RoyBatty]

Your desire to 'piss on burnouts' is irrelevant to your desire to further science. Professionals have a desire to contribute to their chosen industry rather than solely pursue financial gain, financial sector professionals are solely interested in financial gain.

There are some people in finance who are really into that stuff. In fact, I can see how a person would be intrinsically interested in finance or economics

But I see your point


Although your contempt for your fellow man does make me question your motives for going into medicine.

I didn't say I wanted to be a neurosurgeon

This is the kind of thing I am interested in, as you can see from my sig:

www(dot)onr(dot)navy(dot)mil/sci_tech/34/341/ne_comp.asp
This program unit fosters research to elucidate the organization, structural bases, and operational algorithms characterizing information-processing networks within neural systems. The goal is the development of biological neural networks that incorporate the organizational principles and operational rules of real nervous systems that provide demonstrable enhancements in the capability of information processing systems. Research supported includes neural microcircuitry, in particular from cortical networks, and sensorimotor systems composed of multiple networks. The interest in microcircuitry is aimed at elucidating the principles of neural structure-function relationships, and identifying those aspects of connectivity, neural biophysics, and network dynamics that enable scaleable, powerful and efficient neural computation. The current priority for this program is development of large-scale cortical models, possibly embedded within larger neural systems, with demonstrable computational ability. The goal is to develop large-scale neocortical models with capabilities extending beyond pattern recognition into the domain of cognitive skills. New brain imaging technologies are providing important data on the neural substrates of cognition at the meso-scale provide an opportunity to bridge neuroscience and cognitive science accounts of cognitive skills. Interdisciplinary approaches that combine cognitive neuroscience and neural modeling based on biological principles are of particular interest. There is interest in computational neuroscience research aimed at developing models of neural structures involved in social interaction and neuroeconomics.So what I am interested in is, like, eh ... in some ways almost a branch of computer science. On steroids. Hence my username: "Nexus 6, Roy Batty. Combat model, optimum self-sufficiency ... probably the leader"

The whole idea is to make the line between biology and technology blurry. Or, actually, blurrier


I hope for the sake of 'the burnouts' you speak of they never have to come to you for treatment.

Again, I don't want to be a medical doctor


The offending nation in question is doing a grand job of distributing its munitions, i dont see why grain takes such a leap in imagination.

Well it's actually doing a somewhat iffy job. Fighting two wars of attrition and kind of frazzled

See, logistics makes things hard


Go to a country afflicted by famine with a truckload of bread and i'll doubt you'll get many complaints about a lack of marmite or tuna paste.

Alright, maybe not, but they'll probably start complaining when they come down with scurvy because they've had nothing to eat but bread for days


read the Forbes 100.

The burden of proof is on you, and entirely on you

Link me

[Dooga Aetrus Blackrazor]

Why don't you care about people simply because they have the capacity to suffer? Do you really have to get into the semantics of "chode" and "non-chode." Pain is pain. If you can do something to alleviate the suffering of another human being, why not do it. Charity and justice are not undertaken solely for thanks and a pat on the back.

I will agree with you that the left tends to put the blame entirely on the capitalists. I think it's pointless semantics. If two parties are equally required to make something happen, such as exploitation, both are technically "responsible." I think when leftists mean blame they should really clarify it to mean "the person who is gaining an advantage." When a revolution occurs, strangely, we won't be acting "unethically" but will be somehow promoting justice.

It's rather convoluted honestly. The only facts I can see is that people X, the majority, are not receiving what they deserve. Therefore, people X need to put forth some effort and revolt against people Y. Tossing around who has moral responsibility for what is pointless.

It's quite evident people do little to improve their circumstances. There are game theoretical issues happening here. If I go out and smash a bank window tomorrow, I can be fairly confident I won't start a revolution. Yet if everyone who had this attitude of helplessness did nothing, we would never have a revolution.

There are so many strategic problems involved. Look at September 11th. One of the planes was brought down by passengers. What excuse did the others have for not doing the same? Everyone will jump to the defense of them and say it's an extreme situation. So is revolutionary politics. I am skeptical that myself, as well as others, would have the courage to do what is necessary.

That being said, the rich don't get where they are by being people of moral courage. They simple exploit markets and/or work hard/get lucky.

Perhaps I am simply confused on what the nature of your question is. Is it "why should we help people who don't help themselves?" Well, teach them how to help themselves or help them. If you do neither, you seem to fall into the category of a "chode" yourself. For you recognize a problem and do nothing to address it.

[RoyBatty]

Perhaps I am simply confused on what the nature of your question is. Is it "why should we help people who don't help themselves?" Well, teach them how to help themselves or help them. If you do neither, you seem to fall into the category of a "chode" yourself. For you recognize a problem and do nothing to address it.

No I recognize the problem, and intend to do something to address it. The problem is essentially with the evolutionary pathway taken by our species. By entering the field of neuroscience, I would be contributing to the huge, largely unanswered body of questions around human nature and how it can be rewritten: the overclocking of the human race. This is a goal I am explicitly interested in, and intend to pursue it as a researcher

The issue I have with political movements that promise an eventual utopia is that they would require us, or, at least, the majority of people to betray a set of ingrained evolved behaviors which are very inconvenient for any kind of real civilization. Even a lot of the non-chode human population suffers from these kinds of deficits. They're really hard to avoid. To achieve utopia with the current human stock would be like ... trying to use recent software on an old 286 processor: nigh impossible. I'm not sure whether figuring out how to produce non-chodes reliably, on a massive scale is sufficient for a utopia, but I can say almost for sure that it is necessary

[Dooga Aetrus Blackrazor]

No I recognize the problem, and intend to do something to address it. The problem is essentially with the evolutionary pathway taken by our species. By entering the field of neuroscience, I would be contributing to the huge, largely unanswered body of questions around human nature and how it can be rewritten: the overclocking of the human race. This is a goal I am explicitly interested in, and intend to pursue it as a researcher

The issue I have with political movements that promise an eventual utopia is that they would require us, or, at least, the majority of people to betray a set of ingrained evolved behaviors which are very inconvenient for any kind of real civilization. Even a lot of the non-chode human population suffers from these kinds of deficits. They're really hard to avoid. To achieve utopia with the current human stock would be like ... trying to use recent software on an old 286 processor: nigh impossible. I'm not sure whether figuring out how to produce non-chodes reliably, on a massive scale is sufficient for a utopia, but I can say almost for sure that it is necessary

What evidence is there to conclude that we are evolutionarily incapable of achieving a utopia. If anything, doesn't the evidence suggest we have evolved to be malleable and easily adapt to new situations?

[RoyBatty]

Evidence for my claim? Look at all the past failed attempts at building a Utopian society, and how they broke down because of people's weaknesses

The best we have been able to achieve, the very best, under the capitalist / social democratic spectrum is a mediocre society

And why should that surprise you when the world is full of mediocre people?

Malleable, yes; tabula rasa, no

For the record I don't believe in free will either