You can't optimize your way to being a good person • Hacker News Board

Re: You can't optimize your way to being a good person

#81

Post by zmgsabst » Tue, Jan 07, 2025, 11:32 PM UTC

roughly wrote: post #12

kelseyfrog wrote: post #6

I'm a moral incompletist. That is, no consistent system of axioms whose theorems can be listed by an effective procedure is capable of proving all truths about moral actions. Either moral systems are complete, or they are consistent. Consistency and completeness are requirements for optimization, so the idea of moral optimization is dead on arrival for me. It's simply not possible, and like the author one will drive…

That's a good way to phrase it, and something I agree with. I'd heard the phrase "epistemological modesty" a while back, and it goes nicely with this - I think a great deal of harm is done in this world by people looking at other people suffering and either convincing themselves or being convinced that there's a greater systemic reason why those people need to suffer. Epistemological modesty suggests whatever grand d…

I’d argue most attempts aren’t actually attempts to do good — they’re justifications for doing wrong.

Eg, DIE as a justification for systemic antisemitism in employment and education.

Re: You can't optimize your way to being a good person

#82

Post by sowerssix » Tue, Jan 07, 2025, 11:43 PM UTC

0cf8612b2e1e wrote: post #49

jimt1234 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

100% ... In my life, I accepted a while back that I don't have to solve world hunger or cure cancer in order to be a good person - just be as courteous to others as I can; focus on the little things. For example, I always park my car in the back of parking lots (or otherwise far away) because I'm perfectly capable of walking, while others might struggle. Is that gonna get me a Nobel prize? Certainly not. But I like t…

I selfishly park in the back because I hate circling the lot looking for a spot. It may/nor be more time efficient on average, but I do not have to deal with that frustration just to save a few steps.

I selfishly park back a little ways myself, simply because far too many parking lots aren't designed for a full-size pickup. The extra steps are definitely worth the frustration saved for me, as well.

Re: You can't optimize your way to being a good person

#83

Post by zmgsabst » Tue, Jan 07, 2025, 11:43 PM UTC

tombert wrote: post #25

ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #18

"Being a good person" has been a theme in my entire adult life. I'm a member of an organization that stresses personal improvement (amongst other things). "Being a good person" can vary, by culture and context. For example, some cultures prescribe brusqueness, and direct communication, while other cultures want us to always "beat around the bush," before coming to the point. Think New York City, versus Richmond, Virg…

I've been accused of having "pathological empathy" before [1], and to this day I refuse to accept that empathy is a weakness. Being able to fairly easily put myself in someone else's shoes is pretty much the only thing I actually like about myself. I feel like part of what defines us as a species is learning how to understand people who do not deserve us to understand them. In 2023 my iPhone was stolen (story is pare…

This depends on the kid, doesn’t it?

> I didn't see any good coming from throwing a 17 year old kid into jail, and I remember how stupid I was when I was 17.

For example, being forced to confront the consequences of their actions at 17 when the punishment is lesser and likely to include diversion or similar might have prevented them from committing a similar crime when older and receiving a harsher penalty — which in your empathy, you ensured would happen by refusing to punish them. Their practice and willingness to use force, as described in your referenced comment, indicates this isn’t their first time committing such a crime. By normalizing that crime wouldn’t be punished, you created a worse situation.

You can see similar unfolding at scale in major US cities, where crime (particularly theft) skyrocketed — and intensified, eg the recent subway burnings in NYC. Without enforcing norms, they break down.

A good heuristic for me is “what happens when everybody behaves that way?” In this case, it leads to society degrading.

Re: You can't optimize your way to being a good person

#84

Post by scotty79 » Tue, Jan 07, 2025, 11:48 PM UTC

Accept that you are evil and just try to do some good every now and then. It's what Christians are told. But somehow everybody seems to be missing the point.

Re: You can't optimize your way to being a good person

#85

Post by PaulDavisThe1st » Tue, Jan 07, 2025, 11:53 PM UTC

gitpusher wrote: post #23

If you spend all your time worrying about how to be a good person, chances are you're not being a good person. Just go do nice things. Volunteer somewhere. Be of service. And stop worrying so much

Last Saturday, myself and two other firefighters managed to find a woman lost in a maze of 40+ miles of trails. Her hip had dislocated, she could not move. The temperatures were in the upper 20s (F) (-3C or so) with serious windchill amidst 35mph/56kph wind gusts. It was extremely dark. We stayed with her and tried to keep her as warm as possible until a UTV arrived to extricate her. I was home by 01:00, after 4hrs outside under the stars.

In the end we didn't really do much at all, but it felt like one of the most meaningful nights of my entire life.

Re: You can't optimize your way to being a good person

#86

Post by mcmcmc » Tue, Jan 07, 2025, 11:54 PM UTC

gitpusher wrote: post #23

If you spend all your time worrying about how to be a good person, chances are you're not being a good person. Just go do nice things. Volunteer somewhere. Be of service. And stop worrying so much

This is where most effective altruism people go wrong. All the money in the world won’t fix anything if no one acts on the problem.

Re: You can't optimize your way to being a good person

#87

Post by GeoAtreides » Tue, Jan 07, 2025, 11:56 PM UTC

poincaredisk wrote: post #13

kelseyfrog wrote: post #6

I'm a moral incompletist. That is, no consistent system of axioms whose theorems can be listed by an effective procedure is capable of proving all truths about moral actions. Either moral systems are complete, or they are consistent. Consistency and completeness are requirements for optimization, so the idea of moral optimization is dead on arrival for me. It's simply not possible, and like the author one will drive…

>Either moral systems are complete, or they are inconsistent. So you mean "incomplete or inconsistent"? It sounds like this is what you meant. Then I disagree. Two examples of a complete and consistent (and computable) moral system: * everything is good * everything is evil

Those are not moral systems, they're sentences with undefined meaning. "Good" and "bad" need to be defined, they can't exist independently, like some intrinsic property of the universe (say, like the fine-structure constant). One could say that's the essential purpose of any moral system: to define what "good" and "bad" mean.

Re: You can't optimize your way to being a good person

#88

Post by ball_of_lint » Wed, Jan 08, 2025, 12:00 AM UTC

kelseyfrog wrote: post #16

poincaredisk wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Either moral systems are complete, or they are inconsistent. So you mean "incomplete or inconsistent"? It sounds like this is what you meant. Then I disagree. Two examples of a complete and consistent (and computable) moral system: * everything is good * everything is evil

d'oh. Thank you, You're right. Edited to reflect what I was trying to say.

It's actually still not exactly right - should be "Either moral systems are incomplete, or they are inconsistent".

Here's an example of a both incomplete and inconsistent Moral system: - Petting dogs is good - Petting cats is bad - Petting dogs is bad

Re: You can't optimize your way to being a good person

#89

Post by ball_of_lint » Wed, Jan 08, 2025, 12:06 AM UTC

kelseyfrog wrote: post #6

I'm a moral incompletist. That is, no consistent system of axioms whose theorems can be listed by an effective procedure is capable of proving all truths about moral actions. Either moral systems are complete, or they are consistent. Consistency and completeness are requirements for optimization, so the idea of moral optimization is dead on arrival for me. It's simply not possible, and like the author one will drive…

Oh wow, this puts words to an insight I've had and lived by for a long time.

I think I'm not just a moral incompletist but also a moral inconsistentist.

My take on the trolley problem is that while it's "best" in some sense to throw the lever, it's not wrong not to. And generally the goal should be "tend towards greater than zero" instead of "maximize morality points". Missed opportunities for moral behavior count as 0 and carry that neutral emotional valence instead of being a negative thing to agonize over.

Re: You can't optimize your way to being a good person

#90

Post by mrayycombi » Wed, Jan 08, 2025, 12:09 AM UTC

I read 5 vaguely written paragraphs of generalities and then am being told about the sham "effective altruists" who gave us Scam Bankman Fraud as their best known adherent.

This article doesn't say anything afaict.

Maybe it should start with "don't be a fake altruist"?