wedrifid comments on A "Failure to Evaluate Return-on-Time" Fallacy - Less Wrong

47 Post author: lionhearted 07 September 2010 07:01PM

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

Comments (109)

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

Comment author: John_Maxwell_IV 09 September 2010 06:08:45AM 9 points [-]

Status quo bias. And, the average person's gut morality is not consequentialist but virtue ethicist. Working from your gut, you don't profit-maximize, treating your morale as a resource to be spent and refillled. You work until you "deserve" a break.

Comment author: wedrifid 09 September 2010 06:18:35AM 0 points [-]

And, the average person's gut morality is not consequentialist but virtue ethicist.

This seems at least partly depending on status. Roughly along a "virtue ethicist -> deontologist -> consequentialist" pathway. (With high IQ people more likely to emulate consequentialist morality cognitively.)

Comment author: Douglas_Knight 10 September 2010 03:58:37AM 2 points [-]

And, the average person's gut morality is not consequentialist but virtue ethicist.

This seems at least partly depending on status. Roughly along a "virtue ethicist -> deontologist -> consequentialist" pathway. (With high IQ people more likely to emulate consequentialist morality cognitively.)

Could you elaborate on that, and/or give examples? I suspect that we're talking about completely different things, but I see a lot of high status, high IQ professions like investment banking that seem pretty well described by the idea that the survivors deserve money because they were tough.