= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Lumifer comments on Meme: Valuable Vulnerability - 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)
I interpret this quite in reverse. I see being emotionally secure as being able to handle negative emotions and so you do NOT have to arrange your life to "avoid [the] possibility" which generally leads to a better and more interesting life.
Well I mean some mental strategies dare not risk the possibility of depression sadness etc. To that kind of mindset the "emotional cost" is very relevant. It it is associated with a fragile ego. But it does mean that in certain situations there is a clear option that is the emotionally least taxing even if it is not the most productive or most truthful option. Scapegoating your way out of harm usually leads into things like irresponcibiilty. But it is tempting and for many the default action if no corrective action is taken.
A lack of the ability to handle negative emotions isn't what people mean when they speak about the values of vulnerability.
I'm not talking about the value of vulnerability, I'm talking about the meaning of "emotionally secure".
"emotionally secure" is a vague term that can mean different things in different contexts. In this case I think Slider used it to mean the antonym of vulnerable.
Indeed I mean just the antonym whatever that ends up meaning.
You have to consider that people who do not enter vulnerable states will try to spin it as being the right thing to do. You can get things like the PATRIOT act throught if you refer to "domestic security" if people are terrorised by attacks. You could reasonably question whether it makes sense to forgo freedom to gain security. There is this quote of:
"People who would trade a little bit of freedom in exchange for security, will end up losing both and deserve neither".
But this kind of logic did not end up prevailing. Its not like people admitted that they are too pussy to be the land of the free but interpreted as the circumstances forcing their hand.