= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
gwern comments on Not By Empathy Alone - 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 (108)
I was unaware of any downsides before; how do you suggest I update but to be no longer so keen on empathy? Should I be even keener? (Well, that doesn't sound right...)
Hum, no I think he was referring more to "more interested in diminishing its role in the world". That sounds like you'll actively try to lower the amount of empathy of the world - not just stop being as eager as before to try to increase it. Maybe we (or at least I) misunderstood you on that part.
But (some of) the drawbacks of empathy listed on the article are real, and indeed should lower the energy invested in trying to increase empathy - but they are far from enough to make empathy a "globally bad" thing, or to make me actually try to decrease empathy. I still think the world would be much better off if we had more empathy. Not as much as before, but empathy is still something to promote, not to diminish.
I am more interested in lowering it - before, I had zero interest in lowering it, and now I have some interest, which is more than I had before. (Not nearly enough to make me do anything, but then, it's not like I was actively trying to increase empathy before.)
So, if you could increase world empathy by 1% by pushing one button, decrease it by 1% by pushing a second button, or do nothing, what would you do?
I don't know. Probably nothing in lieu of additional evidence.
So you still have some interest in trying to increase it? I think the way you're phrasing your position above is throwing people off.