whpearson comments on How to always have interesting conversations - Less Wrong

45 Post author: Kaj_Sotala 14 June 2010 12:35AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (331)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: whpearson 02 July 2010 04:01:44PM 0 points [-]

When you have status in a certain context, lower status people will want to affiliate with you, and they can sometimes do so in ways that are annoying. This is indeed a cost of status.

It is not just that. I get annoyed and tune out when anyone bitches and moans. Even people I like otherwise. Especially when they are trying to create ingroup outgroup divisions due to bruised egos (or at least that is how I interpret it).

In the case of mating in particular, I will argue that many people would be better off increasing their skills in the areas of attractiveness, social skills, and social status, according to their own values.

Mating is the social arena where a modest improvement can pay off (if you are going for the monogamy route). A slight improvement might also work if the dating scene is not very competitive where you are. But if we are in the hyper competitive era where only the very attractive men get all the girls, then it won't work very well. It is also the least likely arena for you to get hangers-on or require you to do unethical actions to get ahead, so from this point of view good for geeks.

So I wouldn't have too much of a problem with this. Improving the ability of geeks to work in business and politics I think would get more push back due to ethics such as anti-advertising, truth-telling and simply having to spend a long time to get any good at it due to its competitive nature.

Comment author: Blueberry 02 July 2010 04:14:38PM 0 points [-]

But if we are in the hyper competitive era where only the very attractive men get all the girls

As others have pointed out, this seems highly exaggerated and doesn't seem to match the current situation. Evidence for whether we are?

Comment author: whpearson 02 July 2010 04:24:18PM 1 point [-]

I don't have evidence myself, I was merely exploring a hypothetical.