= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
NancyLebovitz comments on Open thread, September 9-15, 2013 - Less Wrong Discussion
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 (126)
25% of test subjects show sadistic tendencies.
I'm surprised it's as low as 25%, but they only tested for liking to hurt insects. I suspect that the proportion would be a good bit higher for liking to hurt mammals, and likewise for liking to hurt low-status humans, and possibly for liking to lower the status of high-status humans.
Implications for CEV?
Depending on what your cut off point is for sadism that number could be a lot higher. There are also what could be called passive sadist, those that would not actively take a role in sadistic acts but are quite entertained by it. I suspect most people who watch bull fighting would be physically repulsed at the thought of actually stabbing a live animal with a blade, but they sure can watch it. Also, the popularity of videos griefing online gamer lend me to believe many people enjoy this type of mischief.
Calling the last one or two 'sadistic' would be something of a stretch. The impulse to lower the status of another seems rather independent of sadism. That seems to be a straightforward social politics heuristic.
You lower people's status by hurting them, especially by hurting them and getting away with it. I think people show evidence of pleasure in doing so.
After all, if there's a lot of a behavior, it's likely to either cause pleasure or relieve pain.
This is why we need nonfeeling robots we can kick around