Earlier quoted context omitted.
>That might be true, but so what? Keep your identity small. That doesn't say you shouldn't cooperate with people who don't keep their identities small. You can cooperate with people who strongly identify as members of a group without identifying as a member of that group yourself. You're suggesting acting parasitically toward the group, in that you are gaining the benefits of others sacrificing their own goals for gr…
> You're suggesting acting parasitically toward the group, in that you are gaining the benefits of others sacrificing their own goals for group goals, while not sacrificing your own goals for group goals. No, I'm not. I'm saying that not identifying as a member of the group allows you to make a conscious decision on whether to continue to cooperate with a group when the goals of the group no longer are compatible wit…
But that is still parasitic in the sense that others are, as a consequence of identifying strongly with the group, sacrificing their own personal goals in order to achieve group goals, where you are not.
>This is a particularly rich accusation coming from someone who thinks it's normal to behave out of rational self-interest. ;)
Hah, well I don't mean it as an accusation. I'm not criticizing your position on any kind of moral basis, just on a practical one.
>That's true, which is why you'd want to cooperate with groups and then exit them when they cease to be beneficial.
Sure, but the point is that if the members strongly identify as members of the group, the group will be more effective in the short term.
>To be clear, a lot of your negativity on my position seems to be from your assuming that my goals are necessarily selfish.
Well, it's more that I think your position would not end up working for most people trying to further their own self interest, so it's not rational for them to act that way. I think it is generally rational for people to make membership of certain types of groups a significant part of their self-identity.
>If you believe everyone acts only in rational self-interest
I would not make a claim like that unless "rational self-interest" was defined in such a way as to make that claim tautological and therefore uninteresting.