= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Annoyance comments on Rationalists lose when others choose - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (55)
Says whom? It seems to me that revenge can easily be rationally justifiable, even if what motivates people to actually do it is usually non-rational emotional states.
It's rational for birds to build nests, but they don't do so because they possess a rational understanding of why. They don't use rationality. They don't have it. But the rational justification for their actions still exists.
I think the idea is that revenge both requires time, effort, and resources, whilst breeding further malcontent between you and the person you take revenge against, causing you to have a greater field of people who would not wish to help you, or who would work against you.
Alternately, if you were to try and make the same person like you better (though that's not always possible), it would confer more advantages to you generally.
It would, of course, depend on the situation. Perhaps not the word "revenge", but "retribution" can indeed be a calculated and well thought out effective response. Note "response", not "reaction". Revenge is a heuristic reaction, not a thought-out response.