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

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

vox.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 173 posts

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

#91

Post by energy123 »

jimt1234 wrote: post #33
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

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…

"Do no harm" is a far better precept than "be courteous". Lots of harm has been done by courteous people that I'm sure were perfectly lovely to their inner circle and local neighborhood.

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

#92

Post by goda90 »

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

The root of why that doesn't work is because you're mostly thinking about yourself still. "am >>I<< a good person?". Good people spend more time thinking about others, how to make them feel better, how to help. Obviously there's a balance to be had, as you can end up burning out from never taking your own needs into consideration.

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

#93

Post by renewiltord »

Bro, effective altruism is a simple thing: if you have some altruistic goal, you’ll get better results if you choose things that are good at getting the goal. It doesn’t require that your utility function matches anyone else’s.

For instance, I don’t think life (including human) is inherently worth anything so it’s not a big deal if a bunch of kids somewhere die of guinea worm. But for my objectives my charitable giving yields better outcomes. I’m happy with that.

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

#94

Post by bloomingeek »

f1shy wrote: post #9
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. That is interesting. I will be meditating if I can fully subscribe… maybe, but still not sure. What I can say, is that when I was 20 I thought I could clearly say what was right or wrong, then when I was 30, I had to change everything, then with 40… so yeah…

Good point. People tend to say we mellow with age, I think it's that we have more experience that can help us grow more wise. For myself, in my mid-20s, I became a Christian and fell into the trap of religious perfectionism. In my mid-30s I began to see some cracks in what I was being told. (skipping forward) I now understand, in my mid-60s, that God doesn't demand perfectionism, but effort. When I fail, I just get back up and continue to believe that I'll do better next time, knowing there will likely be several more next times.

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

#95

Post by kelseyfrog »

ball_of_lint wrote: post #88
kelseyfrog wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

I see, what you're getting at. Yes. Thank you. Unfortunately, I'm no longer able to edit. I appreciate your patience, and help understanding the difference.

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

#96

Post by tombert »

zmgsabst wrote: post #83
tombert wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Being tried as a child when you’re 17 is by no means a “given”. It’s entirely possible, even likely, that this would go to grownup court and they’d be given the full consequences.

“Force” is a pretty strong word, it was barely a shove. Just enough to give themselves a head start running away.

I do not in any way agree that I created a “worse” situation than a child being sent to prison. I think it is extremely naive to think that sending someone to an American prison will create anything but a worse felon. This isn’t Norway, American prisons are purely punitive.

I don’t know which stats you’re referring to, but I highly doubt that “yuppies not pressing charges against children stealing two year old iPhones” is a significant cause of a crime uptake.

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

#97

Post by hackable_sand »

Dfiesl wrote: post #73
atmosx wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're guessing wrong. Kindness has a merit on it's own and ultimately it's a good idea for a person to decide what they want to be and take responsibility for their choices. Being kind "because there are too many unkind people out there" sounds wrong. I have no idea how they measured the "too many unkind people out there" but lets assume for a moment this balance shifts - then what? They should be unkind because the…

I think the sentiment is that it feels like theres a lot of unkindness in the world and that makes it a worse place and you can either be part of that or you can make the world a better place by striving to be kind. Thats my interpretation anyway.

It sounds bad because the root comment is priming a negative perspective of the world.

They could have said:

"Most people are kind. Be kind and most people will be kind back." Or something with positive intent. Instead they seem to be priming a superiority trip.

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

#98

Post by TacticalCoder »

OhioMan2943 wrote: post #80

Effective altruism says otherwise

Effective Altruism is a scam. Sam Bankman Fried's guru tried to distance itself from the fraud that happened, tweeting he needed to "reflect" on what happened but... He hasn't handed back the 15 million GBP property bought in England with stolen funds donated by SBF. Now even to this day there are still funds being clawed back from the Enron scam (or at least there was still a few years ago) so that mansion may be clawed back from the Effective Altruism movement, even if it take years.

They're simply a scam. Like most sects.

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

#99

Post by TacticalCoder »

"To laugh often and much; to win the respect of intelligent people and the affection of children; to earn the appreciation of honest critics and endure the betrayal of false friends; to appreciate the beauty; to find the best in others; to leave the world a bit better, whether by a healthy child, a garden patch Or a redeemed social condition; to know even one life has breathed easier because you have lived. This is to have succeeded!”

-- Ralph Waldo Emerson

There's so much evil in this world (the UK rapes scandal which implicated countless men comes to mind [1]) that simply by being not evil and by denouncing evil you're already way better than many.

Doing no harm to anyone is being good enough.

The absolute worst, to me, are those who always seek to pardon evil. For example those who look for excuses to explain the behavior of child rapists and why we should give them a second chance etc.

These people, who pretend to be good, are actually complicit of the pure evil that exists and persists on earth.

Compassion, when it comes at the expense of victims, becomes evil.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotherham_child_sexual_exploit...

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

#100

Post by scotty79 »

ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #45
bell-cot wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Was his "trouble staying employed" because HVAC bored him out of his mind, or attention span issues, or other factors? The world has plenty of people who are really smart, yet are really not "good employee" material.

He was angry . I mean, really angry. He was also very big and intimidating. That didn't help. Most of the anger came from prison, and from being screwed over, to be thrown in there. That can make it difficult to get along with others, and those who don't play well with others, have trouble staying employed. But it's also possible to transcend that kind of thing. I see it regularly. It just takes a lot of work. Painfu…

But he did burgle a house, so obviously he had some pre-existing behavioral issues, right? And those are probably not gone.

> Most of the anger came from prison, and from being screwed over, to be thrown in there.

That clearly illustrates that he didn't progress at all in his understanding of life. I'd be afraid to live within few kilometers of him let alone having him work at my company if I had one

Post reply on HN