I call it a fallacy despite it not being a fallacy if happiness isn't your goal, because I believe it's irrational for it to not be your goal as you would be acting against your own best interest. For example, it's hard to argue someone has your best interest at...
In majority of cases, obviously ignoring exceptions as "exceptions don't make the rule" + I'm financially speaking If someone were to tell you that he spends 8 hours a day working on his business a day, you would consider him to be highly agentic But if someone tells you he...
haha
Honestly, you get brownie points just for the low-inhibness required to wear a mask like that in public lol
It's so far out of what's possible that there's really no information available about how one should or could react.
Fine, if Bob gets an offer that makes his life 1% better at the cost of the lives of everyone else being much worser. Would you be able to have person A's best interest at heart if you were to tell him to not take that offer.
Mind responding to:
For example, it's hard to argue someone has your best interest at heart if they advise you to say no to the following:
Suppose that an advanced team of neuroscientists and computer scientists could hook your brain up to a machine that gave you maximal, beyond-orgasmic pleasure for eternity. Then they will blast you and the pleasure machine into deep space at near light-speed so that you could never be interfered with but at the cost of a billion innocent lives. Would you let them do this for you?
As you didn't respond to my post despite commenting
Do you believe that what you wrote might convince something who's currently not maximizing their own happiness?
I do, do you share the same world-view I shared?
If you're going to down-vote tell me why
I call it a fallacy despite it not being a fallacy if happiness isn't your goal, because I believe it's irrational for it to not be your goal as you would be acting against your own best interest.
For example, it's hard to argue someone has your best interest at heart if they advise you to say no to the following:
... (read more)Suppose that an advanced team of neuroscientists and computer scientists could hook your brain up to a machine that gave you maximal, beyond-orgasmic pleasure for eternity. Then they will blast you and the pleasure machine into deep space at near light-speed so that you could never be interfered with but at the cost
Another stance is that it would suck to die the day before AI makes us immortal (like how Bryan Johnson main motivation for maximizing his lifespan is due to this). Hence trying to delay AI advancement is opposed
Good luck but I highly doubt Cloves will make-up for a nicotine addiction
It is quite inefficient, I remember looking at:
https://polymarket.com/event/biden-seen-in-public-by-friday
https://polymarket.com/event/biden-seen-in-public-before-june
https://polymarket.com/event/biden-seen-in-public-by-friday-may-30
After video footage of him out in public was released (was quite obvious it wasn't fake & that it was new footage, etc) and it took quite a while (I believe almost one hour and some change for >90% YES) for the markets to react. While if it was the stock market it would instantly react.
In majority of cases, obviously ignoring exceptions as "exceptions don't make the rule" + I'm financially speaking
If someone were to tell you that he spends 8 hours a day working on his business a day, you would consider him to be highly agentic
But if someone tells you he spends 8 hours at school or working you would think that to be the bare minimum which billions of people do daily.
The work load is the same, and it's clear that if you can spend the same amount of time people spend on school/work on a business, you'd make substantially more than you would otherwise.
So why does everyone pick the 8 hours at school/work... (read 257 more words →)
Yeah people underestimate how hard social engineering is ngl, cuz it's one of those things very easy to get started in but very hard to be good at