= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
DarthImperius comments on [LINK] Analysis of why excluding hostile people is worth it - 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 (43)
The Star Trek episode "The Enemy Within" gave a plausible answer to this, which gibes with my experience. To really get things done, you need assholes, and you need to be somewhat of an asshole. The meek, non-asshole "Good Kirk" was too weak to lead, while the psychopathic asshole "Bad Kirk" was too aggressive. But the idea that assholes should be exorcised from communities because, for example, they make women run away is just not a persuasive argument. Study the history of great minds and men (yes, almost all men) and you will find assholes everywhere. This is an aspect of our modern culture that I profoundly despise and disagree with: the hostility to conflict and abrasive people. It seems to me to be essentially a celebration of mediocrity. High functioning assholes are the intellectual equivalents of lions hunting infirm gazelles; rather than exorcise them, perhaps we need more of them to prevent mediocrity, stagnation and groupthink.
We might be using different definitions. It's OK to break a few eggs to make an omelette, it's not OK to break a few eggs just for the fun of breaking eggs. I'm pretty sure it's the second kind of people that is usually termed an asshole.
Yes, I think definitions (and understandings) need to be made more explicit.
People who break eggs for the fun of breaking eggs are usually called something along the lines of sadists and psychopaths.
In the context I would assume an "asshole" is someone who just wants X done and does not care at all about your feelings, opinions, convenience, etc. Example one: a recruit training sergeant. Example two: Steve Jobs.
An alternative definition would be "someone who wants to play power and status games" and that's a different case.
An yet another alternative definition is "someone who's more ambitious/aggressive than me".
Right, good classification. From the slides:
Seems like your second definition, "someone who wants to play power and status games" is the closest.