An update on recent technical problems and more from the admin: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/250292/on-technical-difficulties-mod-coverage-and-other-things/p1?new=1
Options
We do we vice?
JamesKeenan
Registered User regular
Registered User regular
I mean specifically the behaviors that we know get us into trouble, no matter what they are. Overeating, procrastination, drug abuse. Any sort of problem, but particularly ones we could probably control. Anger problems, for instance, probably are far more hormonal, and therefore less under control to begin with.
Why do you do them? What's your own justification, do you even want to change it? If so, why don't you?
I begin this topic with my own example. I have a horrible time procrastinating. I should stop, I should plan ahead and get my work done before it's due, but I never do. And honestly, I know, deep inside, that I enjoy the stress. I get excited sometimes thinking about how I'll plan my work to finish at the very last minute. And what's worse, I make it by, always. 8 years or so and I'm just fine. I cognitively recognize I'm being foolish, and yet that doesn't change my feelings, or my actions, at all.
And so as not to merely begin a list or journal-type thread, I'll also posit a question.
What's your over-arching theory of why people do things they are cognitively aware are bad, or will hurt them? Not counting the law here, even.
What's the difference today between the over-weight man who'll decide tomorrow to fix it, and the overweight man who won't? Everyone with extra poundage wishes they could just do like Jared and fix themselves. But Jared was fat everyday until he finally changed.
My theory current model is weak, and can't account for a lot of cases, but is essentially that when people really want change, they go for it. If not, they either don't want things changed as much as they thought, or it might be hormonal.
Thoughts? Admittances?
Why do you do them? What's your own justification, do you even want to change it? If so, why don't you?
I begin this topic with my own example. I have a horrible time procrastinating. I should stop, I should plan ahead and get my work done before it's due, but I never do. And honestly, I know, deep inside, that I enjoy the stress. I get excited sometimes thinking about how I'll plan my work to finish at the very last minute. And what's worse, I make it by, always. 8 years or so and I'm just fine. I cognitively recognize I'm being foolish, and yet that doesn't change my feelings, or my actions, at all.
And so as not to merely begin a list or journal-type thread, I'll also posit a question.
What's your over-arching theory of why people do things they are cognitively aware are bad, or will hurt them? Not counting the law here, even.
What's the difference today between the over-weight man who'll decide tomorrow to fix it, and the overweight man who won't? Everyone with extra poundage wishes they could just do like Jared and fix themselves. But Jared was fat everyday until he finally changed.
My theory current model is weak, and can't account for a lot of cases, but is essentially that when people really want change, they go for it. If not, they either don't want things changed as much as they thought, or it might be hormonal.
Thoughts? Admittances?
JamesKeenan on
0
Posts
Tell someone they'll get cancer from smoking and they'll point out not everyone does. Show them how fuck-awful throat cancer is, and they'll still probably not care because it won't happen to them. Until it does of course.
I mean, I'd prefer an honest academic debate on the subject... but if no one really cares about that, pseudo-intellectual Springer type arguments will suffice, maybe? Within reason, of course.
It's no fun to just... agree about everything.
Another example, my mom basically plays the martyr, a lot. Especially with regards to my grandmother, whom my mother helps constantly. My mom complains all the time about being used and abused and such. Honestly, she is, and she claims she wish it'd stop, but I know she just enjoys the attention, enjoys being able to complain, garner sympathy or respect, etc...
My best guess about procrastinating from assignments is that a) I am very self indulgent and I simply don't want to do it, and b) sitting down and doing the work ahead of time means admitting that I have to sit down and do the work ahead of time, instead of doing it the night before. It means that I can't put things off anymore, limiting my time and restricting me dramatically, and I don't want to admit that. I wrote an 11 page paper for a graduate seminar in one night, and got a great mark, and that did not help my procrastinating habit. If I can do that for anything it means I have utter control over my own time.
Romans 7: 15-20
Is that religiously nutty enough for you?
But no. Not nearly good enough. That's just a launching point for a greater more absurd argument. I probably wouldn't advise anyone get into it, though. I don't foresee such an argument ending well.
In what sense is anyone to blame? Given determinism, blaming people is like blaming machines for their own malfunctions.
Secondly, the argument I had in mind is that no one is responsible for their own actions, as it's only ever societies fault. For whatever reason, under any manifestation, it'd be societies fault for not enforcing good behaviors for starters, and then not resolving them afterward.
Sure. No one is "responsible for their own actions". Our environment (society is a big component of this) and our genetics are responsible for our actions.
There's also the idea that human beings a simply animals are strongly ruled by our baser, more sensual desires. For example, in The Road Less Traveled, Peck argues early on that one of the chief problems people face is dealing with their own suffering. Suffering in this case is mostly referring to delaying satisfaction. Many people don't develop a sufficient capacity to suffer, and hence allows themselves to fall into self-destructive patterns which they know is bad for them, but it feels good at the time and they don't have the capacity to delay this satisfaction, whether it be not procrastinating and getting your work done, or eating unhealthy food, for example.
These are just potential explanations. I'm actually wondering this myself as I tend to engage in very self-destructive habits which I want to stop, but I struggle to do so. I could figure out why, I might be able to stop, so if anyone else figures it out, let me know.
Yes, I didn't mean for the "liberal" comment to be my complete admonishment of determinism. Just... "wishy-washy" sort of scapegoating. We still hold criminals, for example, accountable for their actions. Though, arguably only to protect society, not to actually punish the criminals. Reform, though, is possible. Certainly not guaranteed.
But that is part of it, the genetics/environment part. There's always free will. But... unlike psychological egoism, free will actually has a convincing amount of evidence against it. Or maybe not, I could just be disillusioned.
Given Paganism, it's all whatever god-represents-that-action's fault, but slit a cow's throat & you'll be fine.
Given Catholicism, it's all Adam & Eve's fault & thus our fault & thus we are pretty fucked.
Given Nationalism, it's all their fault.
Given Darwinism, it used to be all the dodo's fault.
Given liberalism, it's all the fault of our baser natural urges, so we should act in recognition of them.
Given Communism, it's all the capitalists fault.
Given National Socialism, it's all the Jews fault.
Given Capitalism, it's all the communists fault.
Given determinism, blaming people is like blaming machines for their own malfunctions.
Next?
https://medium.com/@alascii
The real problem comes from those who actually try to form social institutions around the philosophy that we're all victims.
I'm no pet behavior specialist but I can tell when my dog is bored. He flops over and keeps watching me for the slightest hint that I want to play tug or something. He always has his little tug toy ready, eager to play.
What do we have to say about how counterculture affects behavior? Smoking is cool, spending time in prison is impressive, acting like a slut or a tease is tops, etc. I mean, pop music extolling virtues and singing hosannas isn't made unless you're trying to be funny, right? We're usually encouraged to misbehave by all kinds of media.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rN2VqFPNS8w
Why do we vice? Because it's enjoyable. I don't think it goes beyond that. A life without such joys isn't worth living. Moderation and responsibility are tools that allow us to function within society and thus continue to sin on the side. You can't rock and roll all night and party every day, but there's always the weekend.
I think everyone here should read some Tom Robbins. His novels tend to deal with this topic extensively and eloquently.
PS., don't forget to feed your head.
ALTERNATIVE EXPLANATION
If I were my girlfriend, my response to the question posed in the OP would be this: Life sucks, so it's prudent to spend most of the time high. Every day is a struggle, everything bad is someone else's fault, and we're all going to hell anyway, so drink up. And don't forget to take as much from the people around you as possible.
This point of view is far, far too common. The only one I like less is the one that says we should never vice because someone is watching.
The people you interact with, how, your goals, who's with you doing them, the objects around you... It's all related. I'm 27 and I've lived in over 12 different houses, with dozens of people, including family, friends and significant others. I've experienced first hand how little changes can affect the way you make choices.
It's not as out of control as I made that sound, probably. You just look for the set of circumstances that lead to you being who you want to be by trial and error and hold onto it for dear life when you hit a formula that works somewhat.
Well, now that I re-read it, it IS kinda crazy and out of control, but it's also true. People will come at you with recipes, which is stupid but conforting, and also the reason self-help books are a multi-million industry.
That doesn't make any sense. And your spoiled comment was the opposite of illuminating.
I disagree with the first part of your statement, kind of, and at least partially agree with the second, but I mostly agree with the spirit of what you say.
I don't think we need to pretend anything, necessarily. Given that really, none of us our responsible for our actions, we should have a somewhat more abhorrent view of retributive punishment. That said, until we all start acting in ways that aren't disruptive to society, there's still a necessary place for punishment, insofar as it impacts the future behavior of the disruptive individual in question, and other would-be disruptive individuals.
As to the second bit, yes, until we all start behaving much, much better, we're going to have to keep treating machines, essentially as though they're responsible for their own malfunctions, so long as the accountability will do some good.
Essentially, I think that some changes should be made, but I don't think those changes should be (or would be) disruptive or problematic for society.
Soma.
However, should I give one, it'd be that we focus more on science. Fund scientific research, particularly in the fields of neurology and such. A better understanding of the mind would breed a better understanding of humanity. Policies based on that understanding would follow, and everything would solve itself from there.
Me?
I wasn't really complaining. I was mostly agreeing with ElJeffe, and clarifying what I perceived as rough edges on his take. My edginess comes purely from walking directly into JamesKeenan's desire for a confrontation with a "bleeding heart" etc, etc, and thoroughly disarming him.
My only complaint is the perception of retributive justice as a good in and of itself. The sense, say, that if you were to find a 95-year-old prison escapee on a desert island that the world had forgotten about, you would be doing some good by making him suffer. I think this sense is ultimately harmful, though historically it is a very useful fiction.
My issue with your comment is that it just didn't make any sense, and you're still failing to clarify.
Again, my bleeding heart comment was about the absurd far end of the spectrum, the sort of end that would go opposite "the devil made you do it."
That's all.
i don't think there is the need for some kind of "deep" explanation.
You're theory, as I've gathered, really boils down to that humans lack the ability to accurately predict or grasp the consequences of their own actions?
I can sort of get behind that.
It can't just be that it feels good, though. Why does it feel good? Why, even when we know that tomorrow we'll regret it, we still do it.
I happen to think, in accordance with your own theory, it's case we only ever think we'll probably regret it. And by probably we mean we won't. We're willing to risk our future happiness to satisfy our urges for whatever now. To satisfy our own vices we're irrational and impulsive.
because it's some what off topic, i'll spoiler my response.
all other things being equal, why would anyone ever support the idea of a bad act going unpunished? of course i acknowledge that all other things are never equal. but if all other things were equal, then i think retributive justice should be considered a good in and of itself.
exactly.
as to the question why it feels good, i think most vices feel good due to our physical composition (sex, drugs and junk food).
other vices which do not generally induce physical sensations of pleasure in "normal" people (for example, violence) are generally less indulged in i would imagine. and for those who indulge in violence, im guessing they do so again, because it induces pleasure in them.
i think you're right on target when you state that many of us are willing to risk our future happiness to satisfy our immediate urges.
It's fucked up that they use it so much.
Sorry, just a personal anecdote.
Yeah, so we have vices because we aren't perfect and humans are fundamentally flawed.
We can however, do the damned besterest we can to overcome those tendencies.
Will we be perfect?
No.
Should we ever try to be perfect?
No.
Should we recognize this and strive for something under perfect?
Yes.
Your name isn't Alex, is it?
I know an Alex who says, "Well, it isn't inherently good in and of itself."
I turn off his voice after that, the little pedant. :P
I do however, agree with you completely.
Rehabilitation is always better than retribution.
The media unfortunately, plays a large role in the retributive style of our society.
Law And Order, anyone?
Well actually I'm not a huge fan of retributive justice either, but I'm equally opposed to granting consideration to argument of the opposite extreme in vague terms - I just think it harms any attempt at getting reasonable discourse or reform.
Opposite extreme?
The classic example is in City of God by Augustine, where he recounts a time he broke into an orchard and stole a bunch of apples. Having escaped, he merely had a couple bites before he left the apples on the ground to rot.
That wasn't necessary because it was wrong persay, but rather because it's thrilling to break laws for their own sake.