= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
jimrandomh comments on [gooey request-for-help] I don't know what to do. - 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 (50)
That's interesting. I'm reading Thus Spake Zarathustra right now and noticing a couple things that don't exactly jive too well with our rationalist paradigm here. Still, I didn't expect a comment like this to be downvoted this much based on what I've read from Nietzsche so far.
Is it mostly because of the antisocial tone of this comment, or is it Nietzsche himself that caused the downvotes?
I didn't vote on the grandparent comment, but I probably would've downvoted it if it wasn't already far into the negatives, because it gives advice that would be terrible and destructive. While there may be an interpretation of
which is reasonable, the naive default interpretation of this, and the one that might actually be followed, caches out to "attempt dominance moves over your friends, family and co-workers". Doing that without sufficient skill (which the person this advice was directed at almost certainly lacks) will simply alienate them. And actively seeking "challenge, danger, conflict and conquest" - well, two of those (challenge and conquest) are good things to seek, but the other two (danger and conflict) are stupid and destructive.
Oh, and also, using a throwaway account with "Sith Master" in the name suggests to me that the advice might have been bad in a way that wasn't accidental.
Not to play apologist, but I'd say that people's intuitions for danger and conflict are far too broken to justify blanket acceptance or rejection of actions carrying those emotional tags. Playing chicken with a 300-pound Sumatran tiger is a dangerous act tagged correctly, granted, but ancestral instincts don't often do that a good job of carrying over: people's intuitions for social, technological, or habitual dangers are often completely out of whack relative to their actual importance, and habituation might well be indicated in many cases. Conflict being more of a social construction, I can't make blanket statements about it as easily, but I strongly suspect similar considerations would apply.
I agree with the rest of your comment.
I can agree with this. There was a time when I considered 'a conversation with a random person' to be more or less a dangerous situation. It took a lot of brain hacking to get myself out of THAT.