|
PsychoInternetHawk posted:Yeah the problem with the whole idea of "altruism is really just hedonism" is that it only makes sense if you don't apply it to anything else. If you start applying that logic to other concepts or actions besides altruism it becomes clear that this logic only works by conflating "hedonism" with "doing things for any reason at all" and thus the only non-hedonistic action possible is one that is entirely random. Guavanaut fucked around with this message at 18:26 on May 5, 2016 |
#
?
May 5, 2016 18:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 04:59 |
|
|
Peztopiary posted:Sure, but that dude is arguing that all charity comes from a place of contempt. It's very Randian. If you feel contempt when you give someone a couple bucks, that's an indictment of you personally, not all Humanity. Obviously people don't instantly feel contempt toward anyone they help, especially if the help is offered on an equal basis. It's when one person is systematically subordinated to another person, or when someone starts to feel outright pity for another human being, that the process slowly becomes toxic. Human emotions are complicated. Tipping is a way of letting the customer exercise power over the server. Studies consistently show that this results in all kinds of bad outcomes. Female waiters are more subject to sexism and unable to fight back, attractive servers get higher tips than less attractive ones, whites get better tips than blacks, etc. It would be far better to eliminate tipping and pay everyone involved equal wages. Yet customers often react very badly when they learn they can't tip because it robs them of the opportunity to exercise control over the compensation given to the server. When everything is going well people often mask what they are doing, even to themselves. They don't really want to acknowledge that their getting off on choosing how much of a tip the server deservs. But of course that's what they are doing and it's very enjoyable because it grants you a momentary sense of control over another person. Jack Gladney posted:It is demeaning to lose autonomy and to be reminded that you do not have autonomy. If you are a decent human being, you sometimes think about how not to humiliate others when doing for them what they cannot do for themselves. The negative psychology works both ways. Both the giver and receiver of charity are changed by the act. It's harmless or even beneficial in small doses but when a society begins to institutionalize or depend upon the instincts of charity and pity to take care of the weak and forgotten members of that society it creates exactly the kind of Just-World-fallacy-inspired dystopia that much of North American society has degenerated into. Liberals will pretend we can have massive inequality and then depend on the rich to generously sprinkle crumbs for the rest of us. Conservatives are even more horrid and suggest that the charity should be privately based. It would obviously be better to focus on reducing inequality rather than pitying the unfortunates and tossing them crumbs, but this solution isn't amendable to the people who desperately want to feel superior to their fellow human beings. Pity is an ugly emotion.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2016 19:07
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:That's what they're trying to prove though, that humans by their nature of being rational are also selfish, even when they're being altruistic. A = A etc. I don't think these people understand that a philosophical truism is not the same as truth.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2016 20:19
|
|
|
There's a lot they don't understand. I'm beginning to suspect that we shouldn't take them seriously.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2016 20:23
|
|
|
Jack Gladney posted:Dignity is a pretty fundamental need. There are conditions under which one's own powerlessness can be exploited to deprive them of their dignity, including some in which one's hardships are simultaneously reduced or removed. There are also ways of helping another person that do not assault his or her dignity. Pretty much,. The entire Asian concept of "face" is pretty much this.
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2016 20:25
|
|
|
My favorite piece of literature is Akutagawa Ryuunosuke's Kappa
|
|
#
?
May 5, 2016 20:37
|
|
|
Maimonides dealt with this whole charity thing in the Middle Ages and while I think you could quibble on the margins, his own order of the best forms of giving are a good benchmark. I guess you can argue whether giving tax money to the WELFARE MAN is the second-best kind or the least-best kind but that seems more like an attitude problem than an issue with the giving of tzedekah.  e: tipping is definitely the worst form of giving and the restaurant should pay their servers adequately, rendering any small gratuities genuine and spontaneous Nessus fucked around with this message at 20:46 on May 5, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 5, 2016 20:43
|
|
|
Ddraig posted:Pretty much,. The entire Asian concept of "face" is pretty much this. In Japan, the hikikomori/NEET issue with their young populace stems a lot out of this: their life experiences don't match what they were promised and their 'outside' doesn't match their 'inside' on a socially acceptable level. E: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honne_and_tatemae Armani fucked around with this message at 18:38 on May 6, 2016 |
|
#
?
May 6, 2016 18:36
|
|
|
Jack Gladney posted:There's a lot they don't understand. I'm beginning to suspect that we shouldn't take them seriously. What
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 05:08
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:That's what they're trying to prove though, that humans by their nature of being rational are also selfish, even when they're being altruistic. A = A etc. Minus the Randian association you threw in at the end, this is true. Objectivists would not argue that helping others is an inherently selfish action, seeing as they view the concept of self-sacrifice as abhorrent and don't make the connection between "helping others makes the world a better place" and "the world being a better place benefits me."
|
|
#
?
May 7, 2016 21:01
|
|
|
Conflating Rand's ideas with Nietzsche's suggests a lack of familiarity with one or both of those authors, as does suggesting that Nietzsche believed humans were inherently rational and selfish.
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2016 17:38
|
|
|
Alternately, the point of the conflation is to show that Rand seems not to have understood, or chose to overlook, a lot of Nietzsche's actual ideas
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2016 17:51
|
|
|
Helsing posted:Conflating Rand's ideas with Nietzsche's suggests a lack of familiarity with one or both of those authors, as does suggesting that Nietzsche believed humans were inherently rational and selfish. Kit Walker posted:Minus the Randian association you threw in at the end, this is true. Objectivists would not argue that helping others is an inherently selfish action, seeing as they view the concept of self-sacrifice as abhorrent and don't make the connection between "helping others makes the world a better place" and "the world being a better place benefits me."
|
|
#
?
May 8, 2016 17:58
|
|
|
Questions Skeptics Have For The Alt Right does this count as necro-posting? Let me know to close the thread
|
|
#
?
Sep 15, 2016 03:02
|
|
|
Who are the best alt-right philosophers I should read? Looking to get into the alt-right.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2016 02:01
|
|
|
Define "best". It's not a group renowned for its intellectual titans.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2016 02:03
|
|
|
Bulkiest Toaster posted:Who are the best alt-right philosophers I should read? Looking to get into the alt-right. 'Best' by which measure?
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2016 02:03
|
|
|
Well is there any masterwork that everyone reads? Who is the big figure?
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2016 02:07
|
|
|
Bulkiest Toaster posted:Well is there any masterwork that everyone reads? Who is the big figure? The answer to both of your questions is that there isn't one. You could try reading Moldbug if you're a masochist though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2016 02:08
|
|
|
Bulkiest Toaster posted:Well is there any masterwork that everyone reads? Who is the big figure? They are really into science fiction and blogs. Even like actual Nietzsche is so much smarter and better than the entire movement that there's no point in using him to understand them. It's like with randroids but times ten.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2016 02:28
|
|
|
Bulkiest Toaster posted:Well is there any masterwork that everyone reads? Who is the big figure? /r/redpill.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2016 02:28
|
|
|
Julius Evola is a key figure, and spectacularly insane to boot.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2016 02:29
|
|
|
ive missed this thread 
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2016 03:22
|
|
|
Bulkiest Toaster posted:Well is there any masterwork that everyone reads? Who is the big figure? https://www.amazon.com/Whitey-Moon-Politics-death-Program/dp/1519461267/ref=la_B00FFEXMN8_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1483151119&sr=1-1  hes a white nationalist using a pseudonym of the main character from the Death Wish movies 
BornAPoorBlkChild fucked around with this message at 03:32 on Dec 31, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2016 03:29
|
|
|
Bulkiest Toaster posted:Well is there any masterwork that everyone reads? Who is the big figure? There's always Mein Kampf.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2016 03:29
|
|
|
Race Realists posted:https://www.amazon.com/Whitey-Moon-Politics-death-Program/dp/1519461267/ref=la_B00FFEXMN8_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1483151119&sr=1-1 https://twitter.com/sbpdl/status/814857805454774272 https://twitter.com/sbpdl/status/814991951963549697
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2016 03:43
|
|
|
Cingulate posted:Amazingly, his twitter reveals he actually likes Russia more than he hates Black people. i try to actively avoid that guy's twitter/blog
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2016 04:00
|
|
|
Bulkiest Toaster posted:Who are the best alt-right philosophers I should read? Looking to get into the alt-right. oh gawd. This is not an unreasonable question, but it's a rabbit hole of derp, combining obscurity and inanity like all the best worst Internet arguments. Alt-Right: rebranded white nationalism (like, that's explicitly what it was and is intended to be). Neoreaction: a brand put together by the incredibly long-winded Curtis Yarvin, aka Mencius Moldbug. See the RationalWiki article, which I wrote most of. Dark Enlightenment: an umbrella term coined by Nick Land in a terrible essay of the same name. He is the only one of these bozos with anything resembling intellectual chops, so one is allowed to feel disappointed that he's clubbing it up with these idiots. The PYF Dark Enlightenment Thinker thread is pretty good (I'm there a lot), if you read the first thirty pages then skip to the end and avoid Cingulate's threadshitting.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2016 11:23
|
|
|
"Neoreaction: a basilisk" is really the first and last word in the field.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2016 13:51
|
|
|
Doc Hawkins posted:"Neoreaction: a basilisk" is really the first and last word in the field. Seriously. Buy a copy off Phil Sandifer and be willing to skim the bits about William Blake toward the back.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2016 15:47
|
|
|
Pope Guilty posted:Seriously. Buy a copy off Phil Sandifer and be willing to skim the bits about William Blake toward the back. Hey, that bit answers the questions the DE ask! Specifically, that (a) William Blake answered all their concerns two hundred years ahead (b) Nick Land in particular, as an educated Englishman, has no excuse not to have known this. NaB is currently in preparation (I think Phil has two more bonus essays to write - TERFs and Icke) and will be properly released in 2017. Some preview segments here. there's a bootleg of an early draft up on libgen, cos if you're gonna be bootlegged then be bootlegged by the best
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2016 16:15
|
|
|
Bulkiest Toaster posted:Who are the best alt-right philosophers I should read? Looking to get into the alt-right. getting into the alt-right is really easy, just post racist as gently caress things on your twitter and call people cucks no philosophizing necessary the question is why you would want to
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2016 17:20
|
|
|
Jazerus posted:getting into the alt-right is really easy, just post racist as gently caress things on your twitter and call people cucks Because they've somehow become a political force in the USA, and most people are uncomfortable with the idea of shooting fellow citizens to preserve democracy, so they convince themselves that these people can be studied, and thus understood and reasoned with.
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2017 00:49
|
|
|
Bishounen Bonanza posted:Because they've somehow become a political force in the USA, and most people are uncomfortable with the idea of shooting fellow citizens to preserve democracy, so they convince themselves that these people can be studied, and thus understood and reasoned with. Funny enough alot of people I know who claim to be conservative. (Of course theny also want their social security and medicare, andwhen pressed say that if welfare inolved you putting on a shirt twenty hours a week that said ON WELFARE and picking up trash they would support it in perpetuity) would be happy to see all nazis shot. So just run on a platform of SHOOT ALL NAZIS!
|
|
#
?
Jan 1, 2017 01:05
|
|
|
 at the OP closing down that "Why is the far right so dominant online?" threadtoo uncomfortable to see what's been under her nose the whole time
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2017 13:49
|
|
|
Race Realists posted:
I hope your AV is treating you okay. The professor in your AV is similar to your politics and is one of the first images when you look up "race realism"
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2017 20:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 04:59 |
|
|
Bulkiest Toaster posted:Well is there any masterwork that everyone reads? Who is the big figure? Dilbert and Dilbert, respectively.
|
|
#
?
Jan 5, 2017 20:50
|
|
