All of Nacruno96's Comments + Replies

Another karma comment

I think this scenario still seems unlikely in the sense that there would be more actors, but in general the story convais a very important risk. so thumbs up to this block post

I am a bit surprised about one of them still being a friend of yours. Do you in a sense forgive him because I don't know it wasn't too painful or him being not aware of what he was doing? My intuition was kind of the amount of trauma might be about the amount of pain. If it's really painful one can of cause get very traumatised as you also point out, it would have been diferent if it would have been very violent

I am no expert in law, but to some extent we treat rape and killing someone similar. I don't know if the way I think is just fucked up or it is really this way, but breaking someone's leg and rape are probably more comparable to each other than rape and murder. So I would like to add that in my opinion even the legal code is punishing rape pretty harsh more comparable to murder than comparable to breaking someone's leg.

Yeah that sums up my problem 

I like cars, windows out of comfort. To deal with Linux you need to know more about computation than I know. Which would probably give you utility, but I at least don’t see any immediate utility for my personal life. I like cars mainly because I am more secure and faster with them than with a bike. Also I just don’t enjoy physical activity. Given having enough money I don’t care companies screwing me in small for me insignificant aspects 

Lol you are a very wise man 

I agree with the first statement of yours. But I disagree with the second. As I stated in my text I think that morality is determined by conflicting emotions. If your morality is build around the wish to help and cultural guilt feelings both motivations will end up in being in conflict with each other. I would however agree that that a axiomatic approach in your sense where you choose the axioms also based on where they will lead you down the rabbit hole makes sense in other fields of philosophy or if the aim of once moral philosophy is achieving rationality above arriving at the right morality 

That’s true, but is that also your opinion?

To be totally honest most of the academic philosophical discussions confuse me in several ways. I am not sure my position can be called extreme moral subjectivism. I for example know you can define justice. And a certain action can be according to that definition just or not. Hence justice exists. But it exists because humans define the idea of justice. Hence killing someone would not be just. The idea of justice however is of interest because our utility perception holds it necessary to create notions of justice towards satisfying or wish to help or towar... (read more)

It doesn’t make killing people moral for most people but for a nazi it is moral to kill the Jews to give an extreme example. Or another example you hate your boss you would like to kill him, but killing him would make you feel guilty. So you measure your expected utility and decide. But I would really Appreciate if you would articulate your view more because I am not sure I totally understood you

I agree

Thank you for your comment. To some extent I hoped for some kind of constructive criticism of this sort. 
 

first, strictly speaking i think rationality in humans will cause them to lack a precise moral system, precisely because our moral feelings (guilt, shame, pleasure in helping someone) are systems that stand in conflict to each other. Hence a consistent moral system cannot regulate our moral systems efficiently. 

your second point or observation is something I am agreeing with. which is why I am advocating a moral system that isn’t strictl... (read more)

I agree. But knowledge was abundant for him too. What wasn’t abundant was critical thinking. And this was the problem from the start

I have the same problem. But I kind of focus on my goals and don’t care so much about what other people say do or recommend. I also doubt that learning about rationality changed you. It was caring about rationality. Because I cared about it most of the time quiet deeply and I was a bit like that all the time. Find people like yourself and if there are no people like yourself just do what you enjoy. And to a certain extent you can enjoy irrational people. They have often some resemblance of humor. Also we are probably not totally rational. 

Which gives this person who is asking nothing. Just do what is fun for you wound be a better advice

Okay not knowing your friend I think she could do following: 

premise one. God probably exists

premise two. I want to believe in him

conclusion I believe in god. That’s it. 

of course it’s weird but if you really want to believe it works. For me and you this isn’t enough. But for her it seems to be

On the side window there is an airbag too in my car but you are right 

You are right death is only the enemy if your life has minimal suffering and somewhat enough pleasure.

Wait what the hell are we talking about. For what do we have airbags in cars? Or is there another reason For a helmet?

i don’t know if you have that much choice over living satisfied or unsatisfied. I think my life satisfaction might probably increase without my covid fear. But everyone is different. 

The death is part of life thing seems to me to be a wise thing to say. But I don’t agree. Death is the ultimate enemy. I would rather lose my sight permanently and for eternity than to die. But that is me. Concerning the quality over quantity thing I would say that it’s a question of circumstance. If you have a happy life. You want to increase the quantity if you have a mixed life probably you would want to increase the quality. I myself think I might be an exception in the sense that I am not being affected hugely by the decrease of socializing. I didn’t socialize much before the covid situation. 

i agree, but how would you calculate tolerable death risks? Where would you draw the line? 

Okay at least I know what it is referring to so I don’t feel like a retard for not knowing the short form

Where do you have the number 0,005 % from ?

I knew this study of people thinking they are good drivers, which could mean everything, but not that they view themselves as cautious drivers. But I red your comment anyways 

I will probably if you convince me

I started to do sports in my room. And concerning social interaction I talk to people on dating apps and relatives on the phone. However I probably talk less than 15 minutes to someone per day. Also probably I should have mentioned before a big motivation in life for me is to live excessively long. I am new to this community what is EA standing for?

What is your expected death risk if you catch it. I tried to determine mine but I ended up with a risk expectation somewhere between 0,4 and 0,001 percent. This estimation was influenced mainly by conflicting data and insecurity about how to account for absent risk factors 

For a human being a view can be right, wrong or as a third option the energy you would need to put in deciding if something is right or wrong is high to the extent that that it would not make sense to go all the way trying to come up with an answer. This is exactly the case with establishing a V value. Unless you are all knowing, hence a god. Therefore given the means humans have, what they are doing is not quite that irrational. You can not be rational beyond your means. You can not say a human is irrational because he doesn’t fly away if he sees a lion. ... (read more)

I have a bit of the same reaction to that. You can know all the stuff mentioned here and I will read it again but if you don’t have the instinct to ask yourself this simple question it will not matter.

Why do we not become a political party and build a rational world government. Or a less wrong world government ?

Hold on. The part about humans being irrational is a bit problematic in my view. I agree they are sometimes irrational but I think your assumptions are too strong. First of all by engaging in all those things to maximize V you would need to put extremely much energy and you are not even sure you would succeed. Besides maximizing V is not just maximizing something but also minimizing pain to some extent your model of the hyper rational person would not be a human. Because pain would not exist for him. A normal person would be totally bored in pain by perusi... (read more)

I am not sure if this would solve the issue for you, but I try to make passive income towards not being dependent on work, so that I have the freedom to do what I want. But I am really not sure this would solve it because I think you pointed out that even wealth can be a limitation. It depends how much time you spend to maintain in it and how successful you are with it

I actually agree with many of your ideas and I think the things you are doing and your approach will show results and work, but there is one huge problem that is making me never go so far to actually change my behavior which makes me end up behaving as I am. I just don’t feel comfortable if I act. Before long I will end up having no respect for the girl I am dating and if she shows interest in me I would know she does not like me but the image I present her. Also implicitly you end up showing more regard for a stranger you don’t know than for yourself, bec... (read more)

I think the amount of effort would would be too high for a masks that would end up being unpractical. It would not filter aerosols reliably and breathing comfort would also be undermined. Also those masks aren’t designed to be used as much as we do know. That’s my theory. But you might be right that it would make sense to do that.

I think you overestimate two things at least. First there is still doubt about if the amount of entering virus is that predicting of the outcome. And I think you overestimate your control on how much you are able to control the amount of Virus entering your body. And I am not sure if being exposed to low quantities of virus will have any health benefit on you.

I agree with everything mentioned in this post. However one could give examples of placed in which the things you mentioned wouldn’t necessarily apply. I do think you could if you see human society as a unity give objective values of a tree or a commodity. Of course the objective value would then never remain the same, because conditions would change, and also it would still have nothing to do with the inherent value. Which is as you pointed out not existing. Also there is a darker dimension to all you mentioned. What would be the value of a human being. s... (read more)