WatDabney

joined 1 year ago
[–] WatDabney@fedia.io -1 points 8 months ago

But that's the stance that proponents of 'rational self-interest' have settled on.

No - it's the stance that people who want to self-affirmingly publicly proclaim their hatred of Rand have assigned to proponents of rational self-interest.

That's the heart of my criticism - people don't discuss or debate the idea - they just trip over each other in their rush to be the one to most vividly proclaim their hatred of Rand. Hating Rand is like a hip internet leftist membership badge, so every time her name comes up, everybody who wants to solidify their image as a hip internet leftist rushes in to say, "Hey! Look at me! Look at how much I hate her! That means I'm one of you!"

And since the hatred comes first, everything else is shaped to accommodate it. Like, for instance, misrepresenting the idea of rational self-interest so that it becomes something easily condemned so that it can be added to the list of reasons to hate Rand.

[–] WatDabney@fedia.io 6 points 8 months ago (2 children)

She is, however, acting in her own rational self-interest by keeping all the value of the new machine for herself and not passing it on to her workers.

No, she rather obviously is not, as vividly illustrated by the fact that she caused so much hostility that she ends up going to the guillotine.

She is very clearly acting in her irrational self- interest.

If she were acting in the group's rational self-interest, she would allow them to work half as long.

And if she were acting in her own rational self-interest, she would do the same, since her well-being (and in fact, as neatly illustrated in the comic, her very life) depends on the well-being of the group.

Since she is acting in her own rational self-interest, she threatens to fire her workers if they do not work the same hours as before and pass the value on to her.

No. Again, she is rather obviously acting in her own irrational self-interest, as vividly illustrated in the last panel.

Any purely rational person (as opposed, mind you, to an empathetic one) would take the option to do that.

What on earth leads you to believe that rationality and empathy are mutually exclusive?

As social animals, empathy is eminently rational, and in fact I would argue that rationality is impossible without it.

[–] WatDabney@fedia.io 4 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Rational group interest IS rational self-interest.

As social animals living in communities and as part of any number of groups, we must, if we're rational, be mindful of the well-being of groups, because our own well-being depends on it.

'Rational self interest' is just being selfish.

No it in fact is not. Selfishness causes any number of negative consequences - suffering, hostility, crime, conflict, rebellion, war, death... So it's bludgeoningly obviously irrational, and therefore cannot be rational self interest.

[–] WatDabney@fedia.io 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Or more pointedly, they are all things that illustrate ways in which it's in your rational self-interest to not be a dickhead.

[–] WatDabney@fedia.io -2 points 8 months ago (10 children)

That series of steps, common or not, is bludgeoningly irrational, and for multiple reasons.

In fact, the introductory part of the comic, showing her rejecting the entirely rational option of working half as long to produce the same amount clearly communicates the point that it's irrational, as does the last frame, illustrating the consequences of her self-evidently irrational choice.

[–] WatDabney@fedia.io 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Funny. Far and away the most noxious person I've seen on this thread isn't the OP, but you.

[–] WatDabney@fedia.io 46 points 8 months ago

The voters have been pretty clearly telling the DNC that they want a different sort of candidate since 2016.

And since 2016, the DNC, more concerned with keeping the corporate soft money flowing than with actually winning elections, has refused to listen.

[–] WatDabney@fedia.io 23 points 9 months ago

So... a likely dishonest source from a dishonest transition team for a dishonest president-elect in the midst of proposing dishonest people for cabinet positions says that one of those dishonest people is potentially going to be replaced because he's... dishonest?

[–] WatDabney@fedia.io 12 points 9 months ago

Nobody ever told you that "only" Trump was bad for Palestine.

If you need to lie to promote your viewpoint, then your viewpoint is shit.

[–] WatDabney@fedia.io 31 points 9 months ago (3 children)

No.

This isn't about Hamas or the hostages - it's about the Israeli hard right's desire to utterly destroy the Palestinians and rule over all the land from the river to the sea, and Netanyahu's need to maintain enough support to stay in office and out of prison.

view more: ‹ prev next ›