Who wants to play the status game? • Hacker News Board

Re: Who wants to play the status game?

#51

Post by RobRivera » Fri, Jan 24, 2020, 2:19 PM UTC

leelin wrote: post #43

My undergrad was a super nerdy school grinding largely solo in the CS lab. Later I did an MBA program to take me completely out of my comfort zone. I gravitated to those who were chill, and perplexed anyone who tried to play the Status Game by losing on purpose. If it was the chess equivalent, I fall into Fool's Mate on move 2. Unfortunately, there ARE times when it helps to be able to quickly convey to new acquainta…

That's a great way of describing it. I'm a lets focus in what matters style of worker, with status bit flips only when facing clients (the degree of bit flio is so drastic that it catches colleagues off guard).

Re: Who wants to play the status game?

#52

Post by SuoDuanDao » Fri, Jan 24, 2020, 2:28 PM UTC

listenallyall wrote: post #20

SuoDuanDao wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suspect that to the elites, the world today is as scary and uncertain as it is for the rest of us. I always get a kick out of watching the Davos videos - this convention of world leaders reminds me of nothing so much as my small-town elementary school, what with all the fads, cliques, and isolation from the wider world. I'd be scared too. I suspect for example that most of the Davos set truly believes in and is wor…

>> most of the Davos set truly believes in and is worried about climate change Over a thousand private jets would indicate the opposite. Perhaps one owner could offer to fly Greta to her next destination, surely one of them must be going to the same place?

One can believe in the reality of a problem and rationalize one's own contribution.

I'm a prime example - I don't need to run a vehicle, I could take the bus to work. Of course, I'd spend two more hours every day commuting, get behind on my sleep, and my health and work performance would suffer. It might be the best thing I could do for the climate. But I'm convinced enough that I'm on the side of the better angels that I do this harm to my fellow organisms in hopes it will make me more effective where it counts.

If I was an Oligarch or world leader commuting to the biggest professional convention of the year, my considerations - and I daresay my decision - would be identical, just on a larger scale.

Re: Who wants to play the status game?

#53

Post by throwlaplace » Fri, Jan 24, 2020, 2:29 PM UTC

lazyjones wrote: post #46

keiferski wrote: post #32

Alternatively, opt out of the status game and try to construct and pursue your own definition of excellence, rather than simply defining it in terms of your position in the social hierarchy. " Main deficiency of active people. Active men are usually lacking in higher activity-I mean individual activity. They are active as officials, businessmen, scholars, that is, as generic beings, but not as quite particular, singl…

Nietzsche famously didn't understand one thing: women / mating strategies. The banker's purpose isn't meaningless, it's a means to an end (even if not always consciously pursued that way) and generally works very well.

people say this all the time but poor people are having kids at a much higher rate than rich people so the theory doesn't pan- if your goal was to have kids you'd stay with your high school sweetheart. and now you'll say "but the banker is trying to attract a high quality mate" to which I'll say that's circular as "quality" here is a synonynm for status.

celibate or not I wouldn't discount Nietzsche; he was pretty insightful.

Re: Who wants to play the status game?

#54

Post by m0llusk » Fri, Jan 24, 2020, 2:32 PM UTC

This analysis is shallow because it fails to connect status competition among people to the larger games we play. Society processes raw materials in order to produce goods and services which generate security for people. Ultimately all status games between people relate back to some aspect of the systems that support society. Are you good at resource extraction? Are too many resources or the wrong resources being extracted? One might be a great parent but a terrible cook or the other way around. What exactly that means and is worth depends on the context and the people.

This is one of the reasons that the great divide is so brutal. One side is competing based on openness, exploration, and understanding while another is identifying authority based on measures of sanctity and staying loyal to what they find is true.

Re: Who wants to play the status game?

#55

Post by mark_l_watson » Fri, Jan 24, 2020, 2:33 PM UTC

Status signaling is complicated and I have been thinking lately how inconsistently I signal. On one hand, I feel very happy with my career and hobbies like writing books and I signal this to people when I first meet them. I try to not be obnoxious, but human nature is human nature. On the other hand, I live in a small town and last spring when I shipped my car across the country as a gift to my granddaughter, I decided to not buy myself a new car. I did this for several reasons: environmental, force myself to walk and get more exercise, and it lets me joke about being poor. For some perverse reasons, I like signaling a lack of material wealth.

Re: Who wants to play the status game?

#56

Post by Aardwolf » Fri, Jan 24, 2020, 2:39 PM UTC

mark_l_watson wrote: post #55

Status signaling is complicated and I have been thinking lately how inconsistently I signal. On one hand, I feel very happy with my career and hobbies like writing books and I signal this to people when I first meet them. I try to not be obnoxious, but human nature is human nature. On the other hand, I live in a small town and last spring when I shipped my car across the country as a gift to my granddaughter, I decid…

Not signaling is also a form of signaling.

Re: Who wants to play the status game?

#57

Post by yboris » Fri, Jan 24, 2020, 2:39 PM UTC

jonathanstrange wrote: post #26

dmos62 wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Single dimension fallacy might be a good alternative name. I'd add that often things don't have a single ordering of goodness at all. Like a tomato sauce: some people like it thick, others watery, others chunky; so it actually has at least 3 orderings.

Well, the general solution of economists is to assume that every person has their own ordering. This doesn't work for Spectrum Arguments by Larry Temkin, though. A typical argument goes like this: Suppose alternative A gives you an extremely high level of well-being for a month. B brings a little bit less well-being than A for two months. C a little bit less well-being for four months, and so forth. In pairwise compa…

I've heard Temkin give talks attacking transitivity and I never buy it. Most of his examples involve infinity which is problematic. In the example you share, I think all it points out is that our ability to compare things (psychologically) is broken: we may think A Z. I strongly think this is a bias akin to scope insensitivity. By the time we get to Z we're likely talking about HUNDREDS OF YEARS of experience, and we just are not psychologically fit to make such a comparison.

So I don't think Temkin is right.

PS - Derek Parfit and the "repugnant conclusion" ... not so repugnant if you think about it right ;)

Re: Who wants to play the status game?

#58

Post by hashkb » Fri, Jan 24, 2020, 2:46 PM UTC

friendlybus wrote: post #39

The article contradicts itself. It calls for an end to status games and at the same time holds up the class system as an easy out for determine status because the class takes care of it for you. That is still a status game. The class system does not substitute individual status relations for an institutional approach, it just ignores them. I lived and worked in London for 5 years and used to an individualistic perspe…

The article explores the issue but doesn't take a strong position. Your attack on it isn't coherent. What point are you trying to make? Seems like you've got a grudge against... society?

Re: Who wants to play the status game?

#59

Post by athenot » Fri, Jan 24, 2020, 2:46 PM UTC

> There is a philosophical conundrum at the root of all this: morality requires we maintain a safety net at the bottom that catches everyone—the alternative is simply inhumane—but we also need an aspirational target at the top, so as to inspire us to excellence, creativity and accomplishment.

The way the author frames this, status is a requirement for "excellence, creativity and accomplishment".

But there are other motivators for excellence, creativity and accomplishment. Some may have an intrinsic yearning to do what they perceive is the right thing. Others may be motivated by love and ready to set aside their own interests for the good of someone else, or for a higher ideal. Still others may be compelled to act by empathy, by seeing others push their own boundaries and step in to reduce their load.

Competition is only one motivator.

Re: Who wants to play the status game?

#60

Post by chadlavi » Fri, Jan 24, 2020, 2:47 PM UTC

This is a really fucking grim view of humanity!

Is it not possible for someone to just want to find common positive interests hobbies and goals with a stranger so they can make a connection and be friends? Does it have to be back-stabby position jockeying and dick-measuring? We don't live in an Aaron Sorkin universe. Sometimes smalltalk is just small talk.