= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
whpearson comments on A Challenge for LessWrong - 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 (158)
We are talking at cross purposes somewhat.
There are two points.
1) There is working at something you dislike for a greater good (as long as you are very very sure that it will be a net positive. All the talks of cognitive deficits of humans do not inspire confidence in my own decision making abilities)
2) Improving society through being involved in the consumerist economy as it is a net positive force in itself.
My comment about "worth the name" was mainly about 2 and ignoring 1 for the moment, as I had already conceded it in my initial comment.
Then on this we are naturally in agreement. No sane altruist (where sane includes 'able to adequately research the influence of important decisions) will do things that have a net detriment and there are certainly going to be some activities that fit this category.
I would add another category that specifically refers to doing things that are directly bad so that it allows you to do other things that are good.