6 ms·

Well, it is illogical to be a psychopath, after all...

coldtea 11y ago
What's illogical about it? In fact being a psychopath is the most logical thing (promoting your interests with cold logic with care or mercy for others). All other behaviors need either a faith in some God or man-given morality, ethics, or emotions like love, mercy etc (which, as emotions, are not logical). Of course one can logically come to the conclusion that behaving moraly instead of like a psychopath is better for humanity. But even in that case, giving a damn for what's better for humanity (instead of what maximizes your benefits in your lifespan) is illogical.
- david_ar 11y ago
  Not really, Nash equilibria aren't necessarily the best outcome for any individual (cf the prisoner's dilemma). Cooperation is usually better than every-man-for-himself for everyone involved, hence why social animals evolve altruistic traits. Of course, selfishness works at the expense of an altruistic majority, but that's why people don't like to associate with psychopaths
  - coldtea 11y ago
    That's in game theory. Not many people are ever offered a bona fide "prisoner's dilemma". In most actual real life situations you can get far ahead by behaving as a sociopath. >Of course, selfishness works at the expense of an altruistic majority, but that's why people don't like to associate with psychopaths The thing is that as a sociopath you don't even have to show that you are that to people. You can still pretend to be altruistic (to your advantage) and still push your personal agenda whenever possible covertly.
    - PepeGomez 11y ago
      >The thing is that as a sociopath you don't even have to show that you are that to people. You can still pretend to be altruistic (to your advantage) and still push your personal agenda whenever possible covertly. People aren't stupid.
    - david_ar 11y ago
      Prisoner's dilemma may be an exaggerated example, but it's a strawman argument to conclude that game theory isn't applicable to real life.
  - oldmanjay 11y ago
    Selfishness exists outside of pathology. In fact, I don't know a single human who is not selfish on some level and I suspect such a creature doesn't exist. We do have a huge number of armchair psychiatrists making invalid long-distance diagnoses of people they don't like but that's not really the same thing.
    - david_ar 11y ago
      I never claimed that nobody was at least a little selfish, I was simply arguing that it isn't illogical that most people aren't sociopaths.
  - david_ar 11y ago
    Just to be clear, I'm not saying selfishness doesn't exist, or that cheating the system doesn't work for some people. My point is that altruism is not "illogical", and it doesn't require "a faith in some God or man-given morality, ethics, or emotions like love, mercy etc" to make sense as the parent content suggested.
- icebraining 11y ago
  Why would caring for yourself be "more logical" than for others? I don't think the concept even applies. Logic concerns itself with the validity of reasoning: Given X and Y, you can validly infer Z - it doesn't concern itself with the goals. So, unless there's an underlying axiom that supports the assertion that you should promote your interests above others', it's not "more logical" to do so than to dedicate your life to others.
  - coldtea 11y ago
    >Why would caring for yourself be "more logical" than for others? Because you ARE yourself, and the obvious thing is to maximize your strength. And because caring for others implies "love", "affection", "altruism" (emotions, not rational calculations) and even sacrificing your interests for others, whereas helping yourself is immediately advantageous for you and is in your default interest.
    - icebraining 11y ago
      Because you ARE yourself, and the obvious thing is to maximize your strength. So what? Why is it logical to do the most obvious thing? And because caring for others implies "love", "affection", "altruism" (emotions, not rational calculations) and even sacrificing your interests for others, whereas helping yourself is immediately advantageous for you and is in your default interest. Even if there is a "default interest", you don't arrive to it by logical reasoning - it's no more logical than an emotion.
      - coldtea 11y ago
        >So what? Why is it logical to do the most obvious thing? Because that's how logic works. We are not discussing Logic the mathematical formalism (A=A, A=C, A!=B => B!=C) here.
        icebraining 11y ago
        I understand we are not discussing the mathematical formalism, but that doesn't answer my question. Logical thinking is reasoning; just doing something because it feels obvious doesn't sound like application of reasoning. Many obvious things are reveled to be inadvisable when carefully considered. Also, I don't believe that taking care of yourself is obvious if you remove emotions. Self-preservation is an emotional instinct, not some logical axiom.
- jameshart 11y ago
  I believe the traditional 'logical' argument is that "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few"...
  - coldtea 11y ago
    There's no logic (as in hard rational calculation about getting your maximum advantage) involved that argument -- it's a value judgement promoting sacrificing personal enjoyment, needs, interests etc. for others.
    - valarauca1 11y ago
      Desiring personal enjoyment is illogical according to: Buddhism, Stoicism, Cyncism, Epicureanism, Stoicism, and Neopythagoreanism. All schools of thought that actively advocate against self desire and state that it is something that you must first purge yourself of before you can achieve happiness. A lot of pure logical schools advocate that want and desire is the root of all suffering. The difference between these schools and say Randianism is they reject one can suffer of the soul. You do not desire an end of suffering, but you desire an end of desire.

What's illogical about it? In fact being a psychopath is the most logical thing (promoting your interests with cold logic with care or mercy for others). All other behaviors need either a faith in some God or man-given morality, ethics, or emotions like love, mercy etc (which, as emotions, are not logical). Of course one can logically come to the conclusion that behaving moraly instead of like a psychopath is better for humanity. But even in that case, giving a damn for what's better for humanity (instead of what maximizes your benefits in your lifespan) is illogical.

david_ar 11y ago
Not really, Nash equilibria aren't necessarily the best outcome for any individual (cf the prisoner's dilemma). Cooperation is usually better than every-man-for-himself for everyone involved, hence why social animals evolve altruistic traits. Of course, selfishness works at the expense of an altruistic majority, but that's why people don't like to associate with psychopaths
- coldtea 11y ago
  That's in game theory. Not many people are ever offered a bona fide "prisoner's dilemma". In most actual real life situations you can get far ahead by behaving as a sociopath. >Of course, selfishness works at the expense of an altruistic majority, but that's why people don't like to associate with psychopaths The thing is that as a sociopath you don't even have to show that you are that to people. You can still pretend to be altruistic (to your advantage) and still push your personal agenda whenever possible covertly.
  - PepeGomez 11y ago
    >The thing is that as a sociopath you don't even have to show that you are that to people. You can still pretend to be altruistic (to your advantage) and still push your personal agenda whenever possible covertly. People aren't stupid.
  - david_ar 11y ago
    Prisoner's dilemma may be an exaggerated example, but it's a strawman argument to conclude that game theory isn't applicable to real life.
- oldmanjay 11y ago
  Selfishness exists outside of pathology. In fact, I don't know a single human who is not selfish on some level and I suspect such a creature doesn't exist. We do have a huge number of armchair psychiatrists making invalid long-distance diagnoses of people they don't like but that's not really the same thing.
  - david_ar 11y ago
    I never claimed that nobody was at least a little selfish, I was simply arguing that it isn't illogical that most people aren't sociopaths.
- david_ar 11y ago
  Just to be clear, I'm not saying selfishness doesn't exist, or that cheating the system doesn't work for some people. My point is that altruism is not "illogical", and it doesn't require "a faith in some God or man-given morality, ethics, or emotions like love, mercy etc" to make sense as the parent content suggested.
icebraining 11y ago
Why would caring for yourself be "more logical" than for others? I don't think the concept even applies. Logic concerns itself with the validity of reasoning: Given X and Y, you can validly infer Z - it doesn't concern itself with the goals. So, unless there's an underlying axiom that supports the assertion that you should promote your interests above others', it's not "more logical" to do so than to dedicate your life to others.
- coldtea 11y ago
  >Why would caring for yourself be "more logical" than for others? Because you ARE yourself, and the obvious thing is to maximize your strength. And because caring for others implies "love", "affection", "altruism" (emotions, not rational calculations) and even sacrificing your interests for others, whereas helping yourself is immediately advantageous for you and is in your default interest.
  - icebraining 11y ago
    Because you ARE yourself, and the obvious thing is to maximize your strength. So what? Why is it logical to do the most obvious thing? And because caring for others implies "love", "affection", "altruism" (emotions, not rational calculations) and even sacrificing your interests for others, whereas helping yourself is immediately advantageous for you and is in your default interest. Even if there is a "default interest", you don't arrive to it by logical reasoning - it's no more logical than an emotion.
    - coldtea 11y ago
      >So what? Why is it logical to do the most obvious thing? Because that's how logic works. We are not discussing Logic the mathematical formalism (A=A, A=C, A!=B => B!=C) here.
      - icebraining 11y ago
        I understand we are not discussing the mathematical formalism, but that doesn't answer my question. Logical thinking is reasoning; just doing something because it feels obvious doesn't sound like application of reasoning. Many obvious things are reveled to be inadvisable when carefully considered. Also, I don't believe that taking care of yourself is obvious if you remove emotions. Self-preservation is an emotional instinct, not some logical axiom.
jameshart 11y ago
I believe the traditional 'logical' argument is that "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few"...
- coldtea 11y ago
  There's no logic (as in hard rational calculation about getting your maximum advantage) involved that argument -- it's a value judgement promoting sacrificing personal enjoyment, needs, interests etc. for others.
  - valarauca1 11y ago
    Desiring personal enjoyment is illogical according to: Buddhism, Stoicism, Cyncism, Epicureanism, Stoicism, and Neopythagoreanism. All schools of thought that actively advocate against self desire and state that it is something that you must first purge yourself of before you can achieve happiness. A lot of pure logical schools advocate that want and desire is the root of all suffering. The difference between these schools and say Randianism is they reject one can suffer of the soul. You do not desire an end of suffering, but you desire an end of desire.