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

Confessions of a bitter cripple (2015)

politicalphilosopher.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 60 posts

Re: Confessions of a bitter cripple (2015)

#31

Post by froh »

jl6 wrote: post #21
ZephyrBlu wrote: post #5

I can understand where the author is coming from, but this is the cruel reality of the world. > "I have sat in philosophy seminars where it was asserted that I should be left to die on a desert island if the choice was between saving me and saving an arbitrary non-disabled person" I would compare this to situations where you are choosing a person with high IQ vs low IQ, or to choosing someone very attractive vs very…

I don’t find these hypothetical choice situations very illuminating, because (a) they tend to involve spherical cows rather than real humans, and (b) it’s possible to come up with arbitrarily morally tricky scenarios. Better to spend energy on the actual decisions people face.

and spend energy in making the world anbetter place, where these hypothetical ideations dont matter.

for example only today in learned that 200sqm feed a human while the global mean agricultural land is 2000sqm per human. now what are the remaining 1800sqm used for, today? and back to ethics: why do humans still starve? who benefits from people starving or living in absolute peverty? which priorities do we need, as a species to change that? or what are the dsm.diagnostic criteria for people shrugging absolute pverty or starvation off as "such is the world?" that is an ethical questions to solve, imnsho.

Re: Confessions of a bitter cripple (2015)

#32

Post by cracker-news »

ZephyrBlu wrote: post #5

I can understand where the author is coming from, but this is the cruel reality of the world. > "I have sat in philosophy seminars where it was asserted that I should be left to die on a desert island if the choice was between saving me and saving an arbitrary non-disabled person" I would compare this to situations where you are choosing a person with high IQ vs low IQ, or to choosing someone very attractive vs very…

Yeah, I'd rather adapt a philosophy of total equality so that tyrannical retards on Hacker News don't get to pick who lives or dies based on some half-baked measure of merit.

Re: Confessions of a bitter cripple (2015)

#33

Post by ZephyrBlu »

beebeepka wrote: post #19
ZephyrBlu wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would like to understand how my comment falls under the is/ought fallacy. > Is a person on the spectrum or with aspergers or with asthma more worthy of immediate death alone on an island compared to a "typical" person? That is a nuanced question that I don't have an answer for. I would tend towards saying no though. > The decision you find easy, rational and ethical, is only so if you have one of a few particular v…

I was willing to give you the benefit of doubt but hiding behind "societal views" and aligning yourself with what "rational" people might do is telling me you are not merely exploring the idea. I mean, it apparently is an easy choice since it's not your ass on the line

In what way am I hiding behind societal views?

I've said that I tend to align with societal views, and my use of "rational" is in relation to what our society tends to value.

> I mean, it apparently is an easy choice since it's not your ass on the line

If you don't think it's an easy choice, I'd like to hear your reasoning for choosing a less intelligent/attractive/abled person given all else is equal in the desert island situation.

Re: Confessions of a bitter cripple (2015)

#34

Post by jiofih »

ZephyrBlu wrote: post #5

I can understand where the author is coming from, but this is the cruel reality of the world. > "I have sat in philosophy seminars where it was asserted that I should be left to die on a desert island if the choice was between saving me and saving an arbitrary non-disabled person" I would compare this to situations where you are choosing a person with high IQ vs low IQ, or to choosing someone very attractive vs very…

Between a fit, charismatic, high IQ handsome man, and Stephen Hawkins, who would you save?

Re: Confessions of a bitter cripple (2015)

#35

Post by girvo »

jiofih wrote: post #34
ZephyrBlu wrote: post #5

I can understand where the author is coming from, but this is the cruel reality of the world. > "I have sat in philosophy seminars where it was asserted that I should be left to die on a desert island if the choice was between saving me and saving an arbitrary non-disabled person" I would compare this to situations where you are choosing a person with high IQ vs low IQ, or to choosing someone very attractive vs very…

Between a fit, charismatic, high IQ handsome man, and Stephen Hawkins, who would you save?

Depends on the hypothetical, no? If it was about maximising our survival chances: the former. If we’re guaranteed to survive and it’s about the good of society, the latter. That’s my pointless 2c on the matter.

Re: Confessions of a bitter cripple (2015)

#36

Post by boffinism »

ZephyrBlu wrote: post #5

I can understand where the author is coming from, but this is the cruel reality of the world. > "I have sat in philosophy seminars where it was asserted that I should be left to die on a desert island if the choice was between saving me and saving an arbitrary non-disabled person" I would compare this to situations where you are choosing a person with high IQ vs low IQ, or to choosing someone very attractive vs very…

Sorry, what? You're saying that an attractive person is more deserving of being saved than an unattractive person? Just so you know, a bunch of people, whi identify as 'not eugenicists' do not agree with you.

Re: Confessions of a bitter cripple (2015)

#37

Post by trashtester »

ZephyrBlu wrote: post #11
mycologos wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Bitter cripple", as the author describes it, seems like an inversion of "bitter incel" in that the "bitter cripple" is angered by the special treatment their disability draws from people, and the "bitter incel" is angered by their perception that nobody views them as romantic candidates. One is about freedom to be a generic stranger, one is about the opportunity to be special to somebody (viewed generously).

I interpreted it in the opposite light. To me, it sounds like the author is angry that people perceive disabled people as being worth less than able people. I see this as being in line with the experience of incels because their perceived worth is so low that no woman wants to be with them.

I would expect that a relatively large percentage of disabled people are also incels, and that being an incel may be one of the more challenging consequences of being disabled.

I wonder how the experience of these disabled incels compare to people who are incels for other reasons.

Re: Confessions of a bitter cripple (2015)

#38

Post by ZephyrBlu »

jiofih wrote: post #34
ZephyrBlu wrote: post #5

I can understand where the author is coming from, but this is the cruel reality of the world. > "I have sat in philosophy seminars where it was asserted that I should be left to die on a desert island if the choice was between saving me and saving an arbitrary non-disabled person" I would compare this to situations where you are choosing a person with high IQ vs low IQ, or to choosing someone very attractive vs very…

Between a fit, charismatic, high IQ handsome man, and Stephen Hawkins, who would you save?

I think who society in general would choose to save is more useful than personal views.

Re: Confessions of a bitter cripple (2015)

#39

Post by ZephyrBlu »

boffinism wrote: post #36
ZephyrBlu wrote: post #5

I can understand where the author is coming from, but this is the cruel reality of the world. > "I have sat in philosophy seminars where it was asserted that I should be left to die on a desert island if the choice was between saving me and saving an arbitrary non-disabled person" I would compare this to situations where you are choosing a person with high IQ vs low IQ, or to choosing someone very attractive vs very…

Sorry, what? You're saying that an attractive person is more deserving of being saved than an unattractive person? Just so you know, a bunch of people, whi identify as 'not eugenicists' do not agree with you.

I don't especially agree with that, but I realize that we have a subconscious bias towards attractive people and that people in general are probably more likely to save an attractive person over an unattractive person.

Re: Confessions of a bitter cripple (2015)

#40

Post by omginternets »

boffinism wrote: post #36
ZephyrBlu wrote: post #5

I can understand where the author is coming from, but this is the cruel reality of the world. > "I have sat in philosophy seminars where it was asserted that I should be left to die on a desert island if the choice was between saving me and saving an arbitrary non-disabled person" I would compare this to situations where you are choosing a person with high IQ vs low IQ, or to choosing someone very attractive vs very…

Sorry, what? You're saying that an attractive person is more deserving of being saved than an unattractive person? Just so you know, a bunch of people, whi identify as 'not eugenicists' do not agree with you.

Im curious, what do you think or his stronger argument: that intelligent and able people should be favored in the event that only a handful of people can be saved? I’m not sure I agree, but I can see where he’s coming from.
Post reply on HN