jkaufman comments on Balancing Costs to Ourselves with Benefits to Others - Less Wrong

4 Post author: jkaufman 22 June 2012 10:31PM

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

Comments (43)

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

Comment author: Dolores1984 23 June 2012 06:47:16AM *  1 point [-]

Yeah, but I'm definitely not anywhere near the point where a mental breakdown is a risk. Hell, I don't even recycle.

And, sure, you should give what you can (what a phrase, hah!), because that's better than doing nothing, but in that simple moral light, that doesn't actually mean we're not evil. We're just choosing to ignore it. For our health.

EDIT:

Even ignoring that, I would probably be much less effective at earning money to donate or convincing other people to do similarly if I were to overly restrict my own consumption.

Would just like to point out that this is a false dichotomy. You could restrict your consumption a lot (at least an order of magnitude) without impairing your ability to help others to a significant degree.

Comment author: jkaufman 23 June 2012 03:00:48PM *  7 points [-]

You could restrict your consumption a lot (at least an order of magnitude) without impairing your ability to help others to a significant degree

Julia and I live on about $22K and give about $45K (more). An order of magnitude would be going down to ~$2K. I wouldn't be able to keep my job, which would cut my donations a lot.

that doesn't actually mean we're not evil. We're just choosing to ignore it. For our health.

I interpreted you as saying you ignored the need to help others when now it sounds like you try to ignore that we're evil not to be doing more. These aren't the same thing, and I think the second one is a somewhat better way to try to resolve the internal conflict. As long as you don't resolve it away to the point you care only about the happiness of yourself and people around you.

Comment author: Dolores1984 23 June 2012 08:10:08PM 3 points [-]

First, my apologies. I assumed you were significantly closer to the mean than you are.

Second: Well, yes, my expressed preferences are still that I care about other people. My concern is that, based on my behavior, I clearly do not. Or, at least, I care about myself and my loved ones at least dozens-if-not-hundreds of times more.

Comment author: jkaufman 23 June 2012 09:06:29PM *  6 points [-]

I assumed you were significantly closer to the mean than you are.

There are people here who take ideas seriously even when this brings them to unsual places. Lesswrong is a strange place.

based on my behavior ... I care about myself and my loved ones at least dozens-if-not-hundreds of times more.

As much as I understand I should value the joy and suffering of all people equally, I can't fully act on it. The happiness of my family and friends, of people around me, feels unavoidably important on a really deep level. I set aside money for my much more generous wife to spend on herself, money that can't be given away, so that she can have some spending money she doesn't feel guilty about. I buy presents for my sisters. I pay to go to contra dances. This is only "revealed preference", however, in as much as it reveals me to be a human, with all the biologically based irrationalities that brings. I would be a better person if I could bring myself to spend all that money on people who need it more, but I don't let angst over my imperfection keep me from doing my best to help others.