Viewing entries in
Explorations Outside
To simplify a whole lot, there are two schools of thought about why people do what they do. One is that people can’t help it because behavior is an outcome of things that they have no control over, like culture, childhood trauma…The other school of thought says behavior is always “on-purpose”. In other words, behavior is goal-directed - by definition. We therefore choose what we do according to the perceived payoff: what we’re trying to achieve or avoid.
Of course, few people want to settle for a low-wage job. So what’s a non-college graduate to do? One thing is to complete a certificate job training program, which can almost double the earning potential of individuals without a high school diploma. Check it out:…
I have noticed these differences in the manner of veterinarians and physicians for years. Why the difference? Is it a matter of workload and stress? Status and power? How much can’t be helped and how much is a choice? How much is related to different incentives and payment systems?
Another way of putting this: focus on the process and uncertainty spurs you on; focus on the outcome and uncertainty makes you stumble.
To the morally outraged, justice is a righteous Reckoning, a collection of what is due. Punishment is a necessary payment to balance the books. But when is enough, enough?
“…a charming stroll through the ruins of late capitalism that feels real and metaphorical at once.” - Review of the TV show Lodge 49: “Lodge 49 Nails the Sad Absurdity of Modern Life” by Matt Zoller Seitz/Vulture.com
According to this view, the sexual revolution allowed men to rationalize sexual pushiness as an expression of cultural liberation, guilt-tripping or otherwise pressuring women to yield in the name of freedom, or of “letting go”. …Or is the sexual revolution being blamed for ills that have other causes?
My point here is simply to highlight that disagreements about “facts” are often less about their accuracy than their use-value - that is, what would happen if a lot of people accepted these facts as true. And thus we have a whole industry of scribblers and pundits who provide “context” to uncontested facts. Of course, such context comes with its own truth-value and use-value.
Everyone contains multitudes. Therein lies redemption.
[Americans] “felt ashamed that ‘their’ country's history was being stained by cruelties, lies, and betrayals. So they went to work in protest—not merely as advocates of universal human rights, but as Americans who loved the common American project…
Doing the math, that means 15% of the American electorate are liberal Democrats and 17% are conservative Republicans. Yet liberals and conservatives are increasingly dominating their respective parties, meaning a lot of the poor electorate is being left out of the political equation. These marginalized Americans may vote for whatever party is closest to their views, but that doesn’t mean they’re happy with it. And it certainly doesn’t mean that they are “really” Democrats or Republicans, as if those two labels represented a natural division of humanity. As if all political inclinations were points along a line stretching from left to right, liberal to conservative. As if “moderate” was simply a middle range on the line, a weaker version of the end points. As if moderates were liberals and conservatives who simply lacked the courage of their true convictions.
Let’s think beyond the line. Thinking within a box would be progress.
We've heard that power corrupts, which is another way of saying that having power makes it easier to lie, cheat, steal, inflict pain, or otherwise engage in bad behavior. This is partly because powerful people tend to be strongly goal-directed…
For instance, "cruel and unusual punishment" may be a legal concept but it is based on the moral principle of proportionality: that a punishment should fit the offense and not exceed what is needed to correct the behavior being punished.
The narrative of victimhood (Us) runs parallel to the narrative of strength (Them), which functions to control dissent within the victim group. Don't sympathize or associate with the enemy - they are powerful and will use you to justify their oppression. If given the chance, they will subvert our cause. If you soft-peddle the harm they have done us, you are a traitor.
Before you know what you’re doing, you don’t know what you’re doing. And other people see it. That’s why being a newbie on the job can be such an excruciating experience: if not in reality, at least in the imagination.
In most cases, lower inequality and higher GDP per capita were associated with higher levels of flourishing…. And then there's Slovakia and Slovenia: more equal, less affluent, and not yet flourishing. And then there's Russia…
When you're hot and sweaty and there's no relief, it's hard to have the energy or inclination to pursue challenging goals. Or just to get stuff done.
“…Happiness was linked to being a taker rather than a giver, whereas meaningfulness went with being a giver rather than a taker. Higher levels of worry, stress, and anxiety were linked to higher meaningfulness but lower happiness." Baumeister, Vohs, et al. (2013). "Some key differences between a happy life and a meaningful life."
In other words, rats make choices based on what they want and what they consider possible. They imagine the future, weigh the relative merit of different actions, seek additional information if needed, choose what to do, and then act. They are agents with desires and goals.
Most people accept that merit should be rewarded and bad behavior punished, but that doesn't tell us much. The difficult question is: how much? Part of the answer to that is: according to the rules of a legitimate system. And what makes a system legitimate?