You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

0
11

[–] DABBING_AT_AUSCHWITZ 0 points 11 points (+11|-0) ago 

it occurred to me that some moral laws might limit pleasure and enjoyment in the short term but in the long term minimize suffering and maximize human fulfillment.

The very first sentence is a description of the "Prisoner's Dilemma". This is how first world societies work, when everybody realizes this.

0
3

[–] Proudarmygal1 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Dabbingatauchwitz Love your username. Hilarious

0
1

[–] DABBING_AT_AUSCHWITZ 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

You're not first, lol bro

0
3

[–] Palindromedan 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

This pattern I see repeating in a similar way with people who are poverty level income. They take their tax returns and buy TVs and shoes and phones instead of investing or saving it for a longer term outcome. They make choices and spend their money in a short term instant gratification mindset instead of short term suffering for long term comfort and security.

0
2

[–] Empire_of_the_mind 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

A not unreasonable part of this has to do with learned experience. Poor people often get that way because they experience significant setbacks regularly and thus have little confidence in wealth preservation. When you only have $1,000 saved and something comes along that costs you $1500 it becomes easy to see saving as rather futile.

The lesson that people need to learn is that you can’t save your way out of poverty. Poor people can only solve their dilemma by increasing income.

0
3

[–] TopTierCIAShill 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

Prisonner's Dilemma is about how two niggers have to decide if they want to rat the other one out for their own benefit. If both do, they get a shittier outcome than if they didn't rat each other out.

Explain how, in this context of OP's post, that this is the Prisoner's Dilemma.

0
4

[–] DABBING_AT_AUSCHWITZ 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

Because you both have to accept a small amount of discomfort for both to benefit in the long run. But if both attempt to avoid a small amount of discomfort, the situation works out worse for both.

0
1

[–] verykindperson 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

are you incapable of applying frameworks to different contexts?

0
0

[–] BLATBLAT4muhGAT ago 

I think he confused "prisoners dilemma" with "game theory".

0
1

[–] cT9NlRLhxlyr 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

There's something underlying people's choices when faced with the prisoner's dilemma: trust. If you believe that the other prisoner will rat you out first, it makes more sense for you to be first. If you believe they will not rat you out, then you are best served by doing the same. Societies flourish when there is mutual trust. Societies disintegrate when trust breaks down. Trust is the reason white and Japanese societies flourish, but all others fail miserably. Importing people from cultures that prioritize "getting theirs" over trust is what is destroying Western culture.

Being honest and trustworthy is critical to a functioning society, and these days nobody teaches kids how important that is.

0
0

[–] DABBING_AT_AUSCHWITZ ago 

Ya, and usually white people can trust each other. Or at least they used to. Not anymore.