When did I get so serious?
So I'm into this whole rationality thing, exemplified by the Less Wrong community. I like to think of it in a fairly casual way, to guard against adhering myself too strongly to a whole body of beliefs (which by my calculations is actually pretty much toeing the party line). Mostly it just seems like a good idea to try to find out the way things actually are as accurately as possible, and to act accordingly as best as possible. As it turns out, that takes some doing, which spawns its own industry and concomitant jargon, but sometimes that's just how things happen.
A big part of it is recognizing what might be unpleasant truths about how humans generally are, where our motivations come from, contradictions between what we say and what we do, what we think we believe and how we act, and so forth. In practice, this turns into the standard model of each and every possible human thought, action, motive, or feature as being some method of status-seeking. I should mention in passing that I’m highly susceptible (although surely many of us are) to the general consensus and standards and assumptions of the people I hang around; particularly if I respect them, which I do in this case. And so the assignment of absolutely every last twitch of the trigeminal nerve to some deep-seated drive to enhance one’s status in one way or another is everpresent and overwhelming, and if I were ever to deny that that is the case for myself or another I would feel as though I am simply lying to myself out of a desire to paint a prettier picture of the world, which desire is probably some deep-seated way to enhance my apparent status.
And perhaps it is becoming obvious that I have these secret opinions that some of the ways in which people talk about this end up being, yes I’ll say the word, cynical. That may not be exactly the thing, but I guess I don’t really believe that everything I do or care about is status-seeking, or that that is the case for everyone else, all the time. Ok, yes, if pressed, I can but only admit that it is true in more instances than I am comfortable with. But I seem to retain the conviction that there remains the option to absolve ourselves of that impulse, to let it go, to do otherwise. I am hesitant to admit this, since I feel it speaks of great naivete or chosen ignorance, but that is more a worry than what I am convinced the truth is.
I think for things like this, things that could be described as ‘cynical’ interpretations of human behavior and psychology, but that nonetheless have evident basis in fact whatever your opinions of it, the more people highlight or illustrate or uncover these motives in themselves and others, the more they consider them to be universal and unavoidable. And if something is universal and unavoidable, then it becomes an acceptable method of functioning. I think this is the sort of tension I have with a lot of behaviors, either that I find unpalatable in myself or discover in others: I don’t feel that the commonness or strength of instinctual urge toward a behavior really justifies it. I could, of course, stand some tempering with my tendency to judge myself or others for exhibiting these behaviors, allow for some understanding of how powerful the urge may be and try to lower my expectations that I or others would not carry through with them.
But it does still feel to me like people sometimes see this sort of universality or (pseudo-)inevitability to be free license to jump in headfirst to such behaviors; like with all kinds of evolutionary psychology, such as the biological male urge to sow one’s seed and dominate others. Perhaps they think not embracing it wholeheartedly is being hypocritical or denying the truth of it; I think rather that embracing is it capitulation, or laziness, or lack of imagination. You don’t have to endorse everything that is. You don’t even have to shrug your shoulders at it. I can’t say that any sort of fight or struggle against it is really an appropriate response. More just a lack of embracing or acceptance, a gentle turning toward alternatives.
A big part of it is recognizing what might be unpleasant truths about how humans generally are, where our motivations come from, contradictions between what we say and what we do, what we think we believe and how we act, and so forth. In practice, this turns into the standard model of each and every possible human thought, action, motive, or feature as being some method of status-seeking. I should mention in passing that I’m highly susceptible (although surely many of us are) to the general consensus and standards and assumptions of the people I hang around; particularly if I respect them, which I do in this case. And so the assignment of absolutely every last twitch of the trigeminal nerve to some deep-seated drive to enhance one’s status in one way or another is everpresent and overwhelming, and if I were ever to deny that that is the case for myself or another I would feel as though I am simply lying to myself out of a desire to paint a prettier picture of the world, which desire is probably some deep-seated way to enhance my apparent status.
And perhaps it is becoming obvious that I have these secret opinions that some of the ways in which people talk about this end up being, yes I’ll say the word, cynical. That may not be exactly the thing, but I guess I don’t really believe that everything I do or care about is status-seeking, or that that is the case for everyone else, all the time. Ok, yes, if pressed, I can but only admit that it is true in more instances than I am comfortable with. But I seem to retain the conviction that there remains the option to absolve ourselves of that impulse, to let it go, to do otherwise. I am hesitant to admit this, since I feel it speaks of great naivete or chosen ignorance, but that is more a worry than what I am convinced the truth is.
I think for things like this, things that could be described as ‘cynical’ interpretations of human behavior and psychology, but that nonetheless have evident basis in fact whatever your opinions of it, the more people highlight or illustrate or uncover these motives in themselves and others, the more they consider them to be universal and unavoidable. And if something is universal and unavoidable, then it becomes an acceptable method of functioning. I think this is the sort of tension I have with a lot of behaviors, either that I find unpalatable in myself or discover in others: I don’t feel that the commonness or strength of instinctual urge toward a behavior really justifies it. I could, of course, stand some tempering with my tendency to judge myself or others for exhibiting these behaviors, allow for some understanding of how powerful the urge may be and try to lower my expectations that I or others would not carry through with them.
But it does still feel to me like people sometimes see this sort of universality or (pseudo-)inevitability to be free license to jump in headfirst to such behaviors; like with all kinds of evolutionary psychology, such as the biological male urge to sow one’s seed and dominate others. Perhaps they think not embracing it wholeheartedly is being hypocritical or denying the truth of it; I think rather that embracing is it capitulation, or laziness, or lack of imagination. You don’t have to endorse everything that is. You don’t even have to shrug your shoulders at it. I can’t say that any sort of fight or struggle against it is really an appropriate response. More just a lack of embracing or acceptance, a gentle turning toward alternatives.