You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

Caue comments on Open Thread, Apr. 13 - Apr. 19, 2015 - Less Wrong Discussion

4 Post author: Gondolinian 13 April 2015 12:19AM

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

Article Navigation

Comments (319)
Tags: open_thread

Comments (319)

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

Comment author: knb 16 April 2015 10:16:11PM *  2 points [-]

But more deeply, I have a transactional attitude towards my relationship with my fiancee. I'm with her because she makes me happy, and because I enjoy spending time with her, and because she seems like a good investment.

Suppose she gets hit by a bus and is now disabled. You calculate that she is no longer a good investment. Do you shrug and write her off as degraded capital? A healthy attitude to a relationship makes the other person an end in herself.

What is an end in itself? Well an end in itself (abbreviated simply as End from this point forwards) is something that is not pursued because of some motive, but that is itself a motive with no further reasons. [...] I think that many people pursue Ends other than happiness, such as the happiness of people they care about, certain life goals, and so on. Now some will say that these things are pursued only because they make the person pursuing them happy, meaning that you work towards the happiness of some other person only because doing that makes you happy. And this may be true for some people, but I doubt that it is true for everyone.

Perhaps it is worth noting that many people associated with the PUA/redpill/manosphere subculture are hostile to the notion that people can ever have a non-transactional relationship. But I put very little stock in their opinions.

Comment author: Caue 16 April 2015 11:47:54PM 0 points [-]

A healthy attitude to a relationship makes the other person an end in herself.

What does it mean for a person to be an end? In the example, is the end the continuity of the relationship, her happiness, or what?

If the end is the continuity of the relationship regardless of quality, or her happiness regardless of his, it doesn't look very "healthy". But if it's conditional on quality or on his own satisfaction, it doesn't look like the "end".

Comment author: Lumifer 17 April 2015 12:11:49AM 0 points [-]

What does it mean for a person to be an end?

It means that this person's happiness/wellbeing is your terminal goal.

Comment author: Caue 17 April 2015 01:36:36AM *  0 points [-]

I was wondering more about the happiness/wellbeing part than the my terminal goal part.

But about that: it would mean it's one of my terminal goals. I'm also not seeing how it would be incompatible with a "transactional relationship".

I feel there's an intended connotation that it should rank high among his terminal goals (in the example, high enough that he shouldn't end the relationship), but this doesn't necessarily follow from "seeing her as an end in herself".

(I think the "intended correct answer" in the scenario is that he shouldn't want to leave her in that situation. This is compatible with him wanting to stay for her sake, but also with him wanting to stay because he would still enjoy being with her. This latter possibility has a better claim to being a healthy relationship than the former, and it's also entirely compatible with a "transactional attitude" as described by Salemicus)

Powered by Reddit Powered by Reddit