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

In the long run, we're all Dad

astralcodexten.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–169 of 169 posts

Re: In the long run, we're all Dad

#161

Post by _gabe_ »

ptaffs wrote: post #100
_gabe_ wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because the second sentence mentions the Bible? Or some other reason? If it’s the former, I’m a Christian but I don’t just close out articles if they’re written by Richard Dawkins or quickly proclaim that they’re an atheist. There’s still a very real chance that they have some wisdom to share. Just because people share a different religious view than me doesn’t mean I can’t learn from them.

As an atheist, mention or quotes from the bible are interesting to me because they help explain our current culture. I'm just challenging your proposal that (all) atheists are not curious.

Ah sorry for the confusion! I chose atheism because it seems diametrically opposed to Christianity in the US, but my intention wasn’t to single out atheists :) . The same sentiment I voiced in my first comment could be said about any religion or belief system: I won’t close an article with Buddhist, relativist, Muslim, etc views just because they mention their belief system.

Re: In the long run, we're all Dad

#162

Post by asylteltine »

cjameskeller wrote: post #135
asylteltine wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes that part is very easy. I can’t understand why someone would choose to give up their prime years for a child. The entire idea of retirement is a direct consequence of this. You don’t need to retire if you can you know, just continuously enjoy your life the entire time.

I think there's a direct comparison to be made with the choice to devote one's "prime years" to building a startup. It's a meaningful project that materially impacts the world in a way that one has a decent degree of control over. And it can be fun, even in the same moments it is deeply difficult!

Not really because you can just walk away from a failing startup. A startup can also profit, or you can hire people to take responsibility away from you, or even sell the startup. A child to me is more akin to a jail sentence in that you can’t escape without getting in even more trouble.

Re: In the long run, we're all Dad

#163

Post by kqr »

Auracle wrote: post #154
kqr wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. Children gave me a lot more time to read , surprisingly, but I have hands that are way too busy to write as much as I would like to.

When does that come? I’m the father of a (very) active 2 year old with another on the way. “Come on daddy, let’s play” is a refrain I hear probably 50 times a day.

Mainly in the first year, to be fair. My children would only sleep with active assistance (stroller, in my arms as I walk around) so I spent many hours walking and had an e-reader with me for that.

Now at 2 and 4 I have the same experience ad you. I hear it gets better!

Re: In the long run, we're all Dad

#164

Post by kqr »

ajkjk wrote: post #148
kqr wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Looking at many of the adults around me, I'm not so sure. It seems to me that these are things that don't come naturally to most people.

Well that's my point. People learn character and wisdom by being shown, not being taught, and nobody was showing them.

I see your point and disagree a little less. I still think (and the Oxford Handbook of Expertise backs me up here) most people benefit from active instruction. If nothing else because it gives them a language in which they can discuss the skill with other people. Very helpful when one desires feedback.

Re: In the long run, we're all Dad

#165

Post by ajkjk »

kqr wrote: post #164
ajkjk wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well that's my point. People learn character and wisdom by being shown, not being taught, and nobody was showing them.

I see your point and disagree a little less. I still think (and the Oxford Handbook of Expertise backs me up here) most people benefit from active instruction. If nothing else because it gives them a language in which they can discuss the skill with other people. Very helpful when one desires feedback.

I guess I think that that's true for skills, but not for aspects of character, and at some level skills like "incorporating feedback"... are really more like "virtues" than "skills"? And things like "noise filtering" and "pattern recognition" are sorta in a grey area between the two. Like, yes, at some level, pattern-recognition is a skill, but to actually learn to do it comes from (a) seeing somebody else do it well and realizing what's possible and (b) being corrected when you mess it up. In either case it's more of something that a good teacher shows instead of teaches. An academic lecture on pattern recognition wouldn't do much; one learns it from going out and engaging with the world and learning from their initially-naive mistakes.

Somewhat related example from my life: you can take as many piano lessons as you want, but there's really no substitute for hearing someone play music that moves you and trying to figure out how to recreate that feeling. Many students of piano have never had that experience and as a result piano lessons will simply never work on them.

Re: In the long run, we're all Dad

#166

Post by fennecbutt »

compiler-guy wrote: post #88

For those wanting to nitpick this or that point from the article: A title like that should set the expectation that it’s not _entirely_ serious and there might, just maybe, be a joke or two buried within.

Isn't that an attempt to gatekeep the comments?

Pretty sure the definition of comment basically encircle "whatever the hell anybody wants to say".

The fact that we all interpret things differently is beautiful; we're not a hive mind even if it does result in all of our strife.

Re: In the long run, we're all Dad

#167

Post by VirusNewbie »

csdvrx wrote: post #69

Is it rational for a rationalist to want to be a parent, knowing that having a kid rewrite your utility function? (so said parent would accept sacrificing their life for saving the life of their child) It looks like the futurama brain slug parasites that someone explained me about last time I asked: https://futurama.fandom.com/wiki/Brain_Slug It's even less rational for a woman, given the many damages it causes to th…

>Is it rational for a rationalist to want to be a parent, knowing that having a kid rewrite your utility function?

I think that is only true if your utility function is a combination of self preservation and hedonistic needs.

We know this doesn't fit everyone, many sacrifice their health, safety, life and comfort for other values.

> All the pronatalist influencers get together and say that pregnancy isn’t so bad.

Many women have one kid, say they're happy they had a kid, but don't want another. However, plenty do elect to have more kids.

Overally though, I'd say for those in life that seek to minimize discomfort and maximize psychological safety, then yeah I think it doesn't make sense to have a kid. But if that doesn't fit someone, there are some great things about it.

Re: In the long run, we're all Dad

#168

Post by galdosdi »

briansm wrote: post #159
galdosdi wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're behaving foolishly. If you spend just a moment looking at it you'd see the author isn't even taking the religious text he's quoting seriously! So your great fear of accidentally interacting with a religious individual is overblown. Well, since you chose not to read it, and continue to choose thusly in similar situations, you'll never really be able to confirm or deny whether or not"his experience of life is re…

I dunno. 'Ignorance is Bliss'. I only have so much brain capacity and attention, I'd rather direct it to what's important to me than leave it wide open to the sewage-infected firehose of incoming information that is life in the 21st Century. An article who's title implies the inevitability of parenthood is probably not good mental fodder.

Oh, it didn't interest you enough to read? But it did interest you enough to comment!

Re: In the long run, we're all Dad

#169

Post by galdosdi »

mgaunard wrote: post #138
galdosdi wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're behaving foolishly. If you spend just a moment looking at it you'd see the author isn't even taking the religious text he's quoting seriously! So your great fear of accidentally interacting with a religious individual is overblown. Well, since you chose not to read it, and continue to choose thusly in similar situations, you'll never really be able to confirm or deny whether or not"his experience of life is re…

I'm not "refusing" to read it. I just reacted on a comment.

Please don't comment on articles that you are unwilling to engage with beyond the headline alone. This is part of HN's rules to keep the discussion from being so superficial
Post reply on HN