Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Master–Slave Morality

en.wikipedia.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 67 posts

Re: Master–Slave Morality

#11

Post by cylon13 »

synlatexc wrote: post #2

Reminded of this quote from Cannery Row: "It has always seemed strange to me, the things we admire in men, kindness and generosity, openness, honesty, understanding and feeling are the concomitants of failure in our system. And those traits we detest, sharpness, greed, acquisitiveness, meanness, egotism and self-interest are the traits of success. And while men admire the quality of the first they love the produce of…

I'm just too nice to be one of those jerk CEOs that society wants. That's why I'm not successful. /s This sounds a lot like "nice guy" syndrome, to be honest.

Edit: Added /s just to be clear.

Re: Master–Slave Morality

#12

Post by devmunchies »

tsimionescu wrote: post #4
synlatexc wrote: post #2

Reminded of this quote from Cannery Row: "It has always seemed strange to me, the things we admire in men, kindness and generosity, openness, honesty, understanding and feeling are the concomitants of failure in our system. And those traits we detest, sharpness, greed, acquisitiveness, meanness, egotism and self-interest are the traits of success. And while men admire the quality of the first they love the produce of…

I think the biggest issue is that for the system to succeed, most participants need to display the first list of traits. But for any individual within the system, personal success may be easier to obtain by displaying the second set (though that is not necessarily true, in my experience).

>most participants need to display the first list of traits

That's exactly how it is. Those with a slave morality are controlled, guided, and protected by those with a master morality to keep society running.

A society of masters moralities will eventually develop a pecking order and will recalibrate itself.

Re: Master–Slave Morality

#13

Post by woodruffw »

The SEP[1] is probably a better reference than Wikipedia for most philosophical topics, especially for individuals like Nietzsche (who, for various reasons, tends to find himself in the intersection of vaguely reactionary thinkers and people who want to read philosophy without seriously engaging with the rest of the canon).

In particular, this Wikipedia article gives the incorrect impression that Nietzsche is especially cynical about divine command and deontological ethics and implies that the MS divide is in some ways constructive. Neither is the case: Nietzsche's moral cynicism is universal and the MS divide is meant to be descriptive, not prescriptive or constructive.

[1]: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/nietzsche-moral-political...

Re: Master–Slave Morality

#14

Post by dvdhnt »

tsimionescu wrote: post #4
synlatexc wrote: post #2

Reminded of this quote from Cannery Row: "It has always seemed strange to me, the things we admire in men, kindness and generosity, openness, honesty, understanding and feeling are the concomitants of failure in our system. And those traits we detest, sharpness, greed, acquisitiveness, meanness, egotism and self-interest are the traits of success. And while men admire the quality of the first they love the produce of…

I think the biggest issue is that for the system to succeed, most participants need to display the first list of traits. But for any individual within the system, personal success may be easier to obtain by displaying the second set (though that is not necessarily true, in my experience).

A few years ago, I did a bit of research into how social programs in Scandinavia were able to take root. My initial hypothesis was - they must be more selfless than a traditional American, so let me find what makes that so.

However, after doing my anecdotal reading, I came away with the belief they are just as, if not more, selfish than Americans, but Swedes for example, are able to support programs because they understand they might need them at some point.

That took me back to another common quote, that Americans see themselves not as poor but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires.

Again, all anecdotal.

Re: Master–Slave Morality

#15

Post by jotm »

jolmg wrote: post #6
stanski wrote: post #3

I can't be the only one thinking this would be an article on drive replication.

I was thinking of 2 drives on an IDE cable[1], until I read "Morality". [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_ATA#Multiple_devices_... (kind of wondering if that use of Master-Slave is so old that I really needed to cite it...)

Yep, had flashbacks of PATA configuration problems, as well :D

Re: Master–Slave Morality

#16

Post by devmunchies »

cylon13 wrote: post #11
synlatexc wrote: post #2

Reminded of this quote from Cannery Row: "It has always seemed strange to me, the things we admire in men, kindness and generosity, openness, honesty, understanding and feeling are the concomitants of failure in our system. And those traits we detest, sharpness, greed, acquisitiveness, meanness, egotism and self-interest are the traits of success. And while men admire the quality of the first they love the produce of…

I'm just too nice to be one of those jerk CEOs that society wants. That's why I'm not successful. /s This sounds a lot like "nice guy" syndrome, to be honest. Edit: Added /s just to be clear.

you can be firm and forward without being a jerk.

Jerk: this looks like shit, do it again.

Not Jerk: almost there. let's do another iteration.

Re: Master–Slave Morality

#17

Post by slowenough »

Hypothesis: In a liberal democracy, when leaders adopts a persona of master morality, the slaves are threatened. If leaders instead project a slave morality, the slaves are peaceable and content.

But behind the scenes, it seems like a state needs to rule with master morality, but for peaceableness, promote the adoption of slave morality among the slaves.

Controversial view: Christianity is a perfect ruling tool because it incentivizes slave morality which keeps people peaceful.

Caveat: I'm not saying Christ wasn't real nor an amazing person. Just noting how the religion could be co-opted for ruling purpose.

Re: Master–Slave Morality

#18

Post by watwut »

agumonkey wrote: post #8
synlatexc wrote: post #2

Reminded of this quote from Cannery Row: "It has always seemed strange to me, the things we admire in men, kindness and generosity, openness, honesty, understanding and feeling are the concomitants of failure in our system. And those traits we detest, sharpness, greed, acquisitiveness, meanness, egotism and self-interest are the traits of success. And while men admire the quality of the first they love the produce of…

Maybe a reason why so many are so fond of mafia movies.

I dont think so. The mafia movies go out of their way to show mafia men relatable, courageous, smart, overcoming adversity, having good motivation initially. Their victims are either not shown, deserve it, weak (instead of principled), or are just not relatable cartoon characters with no real backstory. The consequences of their acts are not really shown.

So they end up being adventure movies essentially where main character shows smarts.

Re: Master–Slave Morality

#20

Post by 0db532a0 »

woodruffw wrote: post #13

The SEP[1] is probably a better reference than Wikipedia for most philosophical topics, especially for individuals like Nietzsche (who, for various reasons, tends to find himself in the intersection of vaguely reactionary thinkers and people who want to read philosophy without seriously engaging with the rest of the canon). In particular, this Wikipedia article gives the incorrect impression that Nietzsche is especia…

Thanks for posting. I posted the Wikipedia page mainly as a basis for discussion. I am going to have a read. I didn't find such a prescriptive or constructive element in the Wikipedia page, though. See final paragraph in the "Society" section.
Post reply on HN