= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Trevor_Blake comments on Is ruthlessness in business executives ever useful? - 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 (24)
Not the question you asked, but something I'll say up front: I am not in favor of private prisons, ruthless or ruthful.
There are no ruthful prisons. Prisons "increase the wealth and quality of life of society as a whole" (as thought-experimental evidence, mentally open all the prisons right this very moment and measure if society is improved, harmed or no change occurs). By "as a whole" I do not mean 'in every instance' but perhaps I have projected my meaning on your words. Prison is great for most people, and rotten for those in it. Private prisons should not exist, but they do, and as ruthless institutions they thrive. I specified private prisons because your question was about businesses and therefore would not include government prisons.
We agree weapons merchants thrive by ruthlessness, even if in the office they are all smiles and handshakes.
It seems to me that the ruthless response to someone I consider (a) dangerous enough in principle to be worth worrying about and (b) currently powerless enough that I can dispose of them as I wish with impunity, is to kill rather than imprison them.
Which suggests that all prisons are ruthful.
(For the record: Not only am I not encouraging it, I actively assert that killing prisoners is a lousy idea. We should not kill prisoners. Especially not identifiable prisoners.)