Konkvistador comments on Fight Zero-Sum Bias - Less Wrong

25 Post author: multifoliaterose 18 July 2010 05:57AM

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

Comments (153)

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

Comment author: Jayson_Virissimo 19 July 2010 06:13:11PM 4 points [-]

Envy is pain at the good fortune of others. -Aristotle

What is the difference between what Aristotle called the vice of envy and the zero-sum bias? I wonder if these two concepts are aiming at the same thing, and if we can learn about one by reading what has been said about the other.

Comment author: [deleted] 19 July 2010 06:43:44PM *  0 points [-]

I have a feeling most Less Wrong readers dislike using the word envy to describe this, though once can get a acurate description of zero sum thinking by using envy in many context.

Your post got me thinking perhaps one could tap into the strong Western arceotpye of "virtues" and things like "seven deadly sins", using them as a pedagogical and memetical tool? I know religious connotations and language are unpopular, but if we find Elizers stories about what are basically romanticized monks (but Bayesian! or in the future! to use a actual TV troope) for ilustrating ideas perhaps compling a list of seven cardinal sins of a aspiring rationalist and matching them with the traditional ones could be something people would be willing to consider.

* Gula (gluttony)
* Fornicatio (fornication, lust)
* Avaritia (avarice/greed)
* Tristitia (sorrow/despair)
* Ira (wrath)
* Acedia (acedia)
* Vanagloria (vainglory)
* Superbia (hubris, pride)

I can see a few posibilities on that list. I think there have been things like calling things rationalist virtues ect. I'm proposing a more explicit piggyback on the existing mems.