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

What Is a Minimally Good Life?

psyche.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 162 posts

Re: What Is a Minimally Good Life?

#61

Post by jl2718 »

globular-toast wrote: post #47
growlist wrote: post #2

I know that personally I really don't need much for my own happiness - the basics of survival, a very modest house, and being away from people and in nature would do it for me. The problem comes when these simple things are denied to me, and I am put in a society in which one is treated badly when one doesn't strive to keep up with the Joneses. Controversial opinion: the people with the power to change the never-endi…

> Controversial opinion: the people with the power to change the never-ending hamster wheel situation are primarly women, in that it is women's selection of mates and desire for consumer goods etc. that drive male competition. If women chose something different, perhaps humanity wouldn't be so rapacious of the earth. I think you are correct that the main driving force here is sex. Sex drives far more of the world tha…

It seems clear to me that society is much more aggressive about controlling male-normative instincts, which are characterized as violent and isolationist. Consumption and financial mating, however, are encouraged and enforced by every level of our social hierarchy. These instincts could also be controlled.

Re: What Is a Minimally Good Life?

#63

Post by globular-toast »

joelbluminator wrote: post #54
globular-toast wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Controversial opinion: the people with the power to change the never-ending hamster wheel situation are primarly women, in that it is women's selection of mates and desire for consumer goods etc. that drive male competition. If women chose something different, perhaps humanity wouldn't be so rapacious of the earth. I think you are correct that the main driving force here is sex. Sex drives far more of the world tha…

Women care about money and education but it's not as if they're all the same. Some care a lot about humour, confidence, hell even artistic abilities. Yes some broke musician can appear very sexy to some women even if he isn't a great provider. Some even care a lot about looks just like men. Women vary quite a lot by who they consider mating potential.

It's important not to confuse individuals with populations.

This is one of the biggest problems when talking about things like this. People make statements about populations and others refute them using observations about individuals. Of course individuals are different, but individuals have very limited control over society. We are not a bunch of unrelated individuals, we are a society. The top level comment is talking about society.

Re: What Is a Minimally Good Life?

#64

Post by AnIdiotOnTheNet »

golergka wrote: post #38
127 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Evolution as a dynamic does build things that are able to reproduce.

On the simplest level. Direct reproduction is far from the only way to propel your genes. You can never have kids, but lead your ethnic group to win a genocidal war against its neighbours, and will be much more successful at it.

With complex minds like those of human beings it can't even be reduced to just genetic survival. Memetic survival is often weighted just as much, if not more.

Re: What Is a Minimally Good Life?

#66

Post by eimrine »

I expected to see at least some links to Stoicism. They do not exist, which is why the article does not answer the question in the title. My opinion is that Stoicism answers this question and in general it is one of the most useful directions of philosophy.

Re: What Is a Minimally Good Life?

#67

Post by AnIdiotOnTheNet »

globular-toast wrote: post #34
randomsearch wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Extremely controversial. Could we not also blame men for competing for the attention of the most attractive women, who then in turn can demand more resources? I do think we attack men for being shallow more often than we attack women for being materialistic. The latter doesn’t get as much attention or critique, eg wanting a bigger house or label fashion is often seen as aspirational and positive; wanting a more attra…

> Why do men who have a partner already feel obliged to continue capturing more and more resources? Two reasons. First, women are hypergamous and will always be looking for the best mate possible. When men become complacent, they lose their women. The battle isn't over when the first mate is attracted, it has only just begun. Second, men are polygamous. Men still want to be attractive to other women as well as their…

> These instincts do rule us, unfortunately. Although many like to think otherwise.

Let me see if I have this straight: selection processes have favored those with the ability to provide for their offspring because it ensures the survival of their lineage. Consequently women tend to consider competitive men who have high wealth and status more attractive, therefore it is the fault of women that men are so competitive?

In your reasoning, men do not have the agency to choose not to be competitive, women do have the agency to choose who they are attracted to, and natural selection pressures are blameless. That's a pretty arbitrary place to draw the line don't you think?

Re: What Is a Minimally Good Life?

#68

Post by kgwxd »

K0balt wrote: post #56
K0balt wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is this sarcasm? Because this seems like a list of "pick some, but not all"... I'd say that 99.99 percent of humanity has not hit all of these goals ever in the history of humanity. If this is the minimally required list, then depression is way, way underdistributed.

Should have added that if a person is sufficiently in denial about negative externalities and risks, black swan events, etc it would be possible to achieve the feeling of accomplished that list, even without having in fact accomplished it... Just as good?

Also, one might have all those things but be fully occupied by the very realistic fear of loosing any one of them at any moment, cancelling most of the happiness.

Re: What Is a Minimally Good Life?

#69

Post by licebmi__at__ »

MorningInfidel wrote: post #35
crumbshot wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This sounds suspiciously like incel ideology. Whatever cognitive path you're on that's led you to conclude this, I advise you to swiftly veer away from it. Blaming all the women isn't going to help with anything. People will just think, oh there's that weird sexist guy ranting on again. That's not going to get you anywhere useful.

If his point is so easy to refute logically, you would have done so. Your entire comment is an ad hominem.

Because the point is not really a logical statement, but an appeal to emotion, expecting a logical refutation to a non logical statement is absurd and TBH, kinda ignorant of all the kinds of valid discussion humans have all the time.

Do you really think is reasonable to demand a change of behavior in women instead of maybe demanding the same from men?

Do you really think men with a couple are no longer part of the competition drivel?

Re: What Is a Minimally Good Life?

#70

Post by jonathanstrange »

K0balt wrote: post #52
jonathanstrange wrote: post #33

What is needed minimally? - a loved and loving partner, a sane and fulfilling sexuality - enough income to not have any substantial worries about the future - absence of other justifiable existential worries and anxiety about the future such as cataclysms, threats, oppressive social, political and work environments, political instability, etc. - a decent amount of recognition in work or private life (one of them suff…

Is this sarcasm? Because this seems like a list of "pick some, but not all"... I'd say that 99.99 percent of humanity has not hit all of these goals ever in the history of humanity. If this is the minimally required list, then depression is way, way underdistributed.

It certainly wasn't meant sarcastically. I agree with you and others that maybe only ticking off some of these points might suffice to some persons to feel overall satisfied, and that it's what they believe/how they feel what counts, not whether these criteria are objectively fulfilled.

There might also be a semantic issue here. For me as a philosopher, leading a good life is not the same as leading an acceptable, overall satisfying, or mostly good life. The way I understand "good life" sets the bar relatively high.

Post reply on HN