Oh, again I was reminded of that I _again_ had forgotten that you play games in life, not to win _every_ game, but to get invited to more games, and to win some of those. But it is a difficult choice.
and you don't play with people who rather cheat than do the right thing. That would be stupid. If you are going to play with someone who screwed you up multiple times, in multiple cases: you should run away from them. They are not poker players. They are the mafia. They own the casino. They rather win relentlessly and take you out if you outplay them. You don't want to "play" with them even when they invite you. Not just because their dirty games cost you too much money or because you have too little left. They are just out for that last couple of cent and have no intent to "play nice". Too dirty to play.
Sorry... Maybe I was too vague. I don't have enough education to express myself properly. Maybe this quote will be helpful: “There's an old saying in Tennessee - I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee - that says, fool me once, shame on - shame on you. Fool me - you can't get fooled again.” ― George W. Bush
I always liked playing video games with my little brother (2 years younger). As a kid I usually won and gloated about it and he would get mad and we wouldn't play again for a long time. It wasn't until I was a young adult that I realized that if I wanted him to keep playing with me, I needed to let him have fun, too, and win sometimes. Then my "game" became how to make sure both of us have fun.
Matt Ridley wrote The Rational Optimist which is a fantastic book and argues that the world/humanity is in the best place it’s ever been across a bunch of different measures and it looks like it’s only going to keep getting better if we can avoid f$&@ing it up.
@@lanagordon5669 yeppp. The problem is that it is already f@cked. You just have to spend time looking at the evidence. One was the amount of destructions fires are causing these days. The intensity, temperature, size of the land can't be compared to the ones from the past. Instead of being optimistic, you really have to make sure you are open minded and try to understand all the data that you have to compute to see the outcome. You have to make sure you are listening to those also, who are less optimistic and they really know their fields. Optimism is not enough because the price of the error is too much.
ooo... not very opinionated! Good for you! It takes time to gather information for your opinion if your goal is to have a strong base for it. It saves so much time to just take the side that it is already fits your vague ideas. What a waste of time arguing about points if nobody really here to make points, only to have an environment where they can feel safe and not pressured into debates, no hard decisions and bad feelings if you may found out things are different, they have changed since the last time you checked. Believe me, it is time consuming an unpopular to be an asshole who holds the mirror. (This is again, sarcasm. I know why! I had spent so much time of my own, I have been called all the names you can imagine just because I have an opinion and I look into it what is the newest science about the subject. I am frustrated & resentful. Why didn't I stopped it and kept it to myself? I should have been doing this me & "my immediate interest first" thing & someone else can do the research if they care.)
The problem is when someone is not intelligent enough to see that certain things look like it cost him money (like tax) today, but not spending money on it will cause more problems for himself too. Also, looking at providing education and healthcare as an expense, instead of thinking about it as an investment is shortsightedness. Waiting for someone else to invest money in the economy and be the one who is benefiting from it is mostly what is happening these days. It seems like nobody gets it. If we stretch our taxes as much as it makes sense to pull people up, we creates customers who can shop for things more expensive than only their daily bread. Creating opportunity for them to become the best version of themselves make them more educated, doing more complex things than what you will be able to get hired for after high school. Employers don't have to pay an arm and a leg for special jobs because there is not only 1 or 2 candidates in the job market but 20. The 20 candidates have to make sure that they keep up with new information and education to be the one that gets hired. The more complex, the bigger is your business, the more employee you need with education. The bigger the company, more the owner can benefit from his employees work. From the employers side, there should be more understanding that they are benefiting not only from their educated employees, but from a heathy economy too. It is not only their own geniousity that they can run a carpet cleaning business (simple example, I didn't want to complicate it as to run a private lab or factory). Because someone went to school, they were able to learn engineering and all kinds of science. People have been trying to improve the quality of the carpet cleaner machine's work. It is getting better, less time to clean a room, more efficient, less water, less soap etc... Because the price is getting lower (you need also a market to have enough businesses that are buying machines), the work is done faster and cheaper, the company can hire more people. It is not that the owner paid for that personally. It is what the tax supposed to do. To create work force, to create educated people, to create opportunities to us to make things more efficient. The bigger the business the more it needs these from a modern society, the more he can benefit from our collective achievements. If it would be only about him, if he has absolutely no responsibility to the community and to others: he would be a cotton farmer who lives off the hard work of the slaves. It would be about how much more you can abuse your slaves, how much you don't care about other human beings and their family. I also understand the opposite side too. It makes sense that someone is able to be more organized, willing to work harder than the rest. I am not promoting ONLY the left. But today, (and in the history of our systems when they were creating and improving quality of life) we usually like to praise the one who owns the company and we disregard the one's work who makes the dreams happen. It is a dance of the two truths and the changing environment, our never ending human creativity. If we are intelligent as a human species, we can dance. If not, it is like street fight. Even worse because at least if it is a street fight, one has the chance to win. The fighters don't need more than their physical strength. We need to be doing more for our economy, for the future of our children, our spices, the health of our earth and of course all living beings. It should not be that the people who have only the ability to fight it like they are doing UFC are promoted or having them as icons. We need dance teacherS who have different risk worthy ideas that may work for all of us. Not everyone who thinks they are UFC materials are UFC materials. Many are closer to be in the mindset of a slave holder and the one who would end up on the ground if he ever had to only rely on himself with absolutely no supportive environment. But we can't wait for that to be proved. Anyway.... It is not street fight, it is a lovely, exciting dance. You can enjoy it so much, you didn't even notice that you are exhausted and your pantyhose have a run up to who knows where... Dancing is good for all of us, using a UFC mindset harms all of us. Even the UFC material. I like dancing... unfortunately not a professional level, only a level that is enough to have fun and to enjoy it. hmmm.... I'm lovin' it.
We should not confuse morals with "position". When we have more narcissists who are looking to be on top with or without having the quality to lead in that field, when they lack the wisdom to see that inequality can go too far, when they confuse creativity, wisdom, leadership with power, the ability to be manipulative and selfish, things can go very wrong: th-cam.com/video/A5u7He4J-VA/w-d-xo.html
I recall an article in Discover magazine back in the early 90's that explored the concept of tit for tat and also tit for two tats. The idea being to turn the other cheek but only once. It was mathematically modeled to show that there was a slight advantage to letting the first transgression slide but to come down hard as hell after the second one. Interesting to hear the discussion decades latter. Still, the game has become so rigged that I have very little tolerance for even tit for tat in today's environment. I think the perception that it's everyone for themselves and there isn't much of a future for many is behind the social violence we are experiencing now.
What on earth are you doing? I ask him. Switching peoples license plates. But why? I ask. If the cops want to waste my time by throwing me in prison, I’ll waste theirs with something they hate, which is hours of paperwork. He answered. I felt nauseous. But what part of causality was so hard or was he choosing to not grasp? A cops job entails arresting criminals, and he imprisoned because they caught him breaking the law. Ah, It’s the age old problem, Criminals most often believe they’re innocent even when evidence proves they are not. Picture human beings as two parts. So when we think an assumption that someone harmed us. The average person knows assumptions are not based on fact and so comes up with other possibilities. It’s like criminals just believe whatever thought they think, at which point becomes truth. If they think their innocent they than believe it and so retaliate against the cops.
This is an individualistic morality though. What happens when an individual understands this game rationally and figures that what is best for all people is to not play it that way, just like, lets say, how jesus figured that there was something larger than himself?
@@RagTagMonster Hey, I made this comment three years ago. The prisoners dilemma is truly a deep problem. Since I made this comment I have read The Idiot by Fyodor Dostoevsky and I think it is relevant to this issue of doing what is rationally right vs practically right. I truly believe that I will never feel certain about how to answer it.
"Self interest" is essential to the morals of the British political philosophy. The American people, in contrast, are always concerned with the interest of others.
I am not sure where have you been. Or how aware of the history this country has. Concerning others happens more where they are in smaller groups, there are waste territories where they can roam. The size of the group, clan are such that the existing hierarchy works by sheer understanding that if the position is filled up with someone who is not capable, the whole community suffers. It is question of life and death, so people choose the most capable of the group. It worked well with hunter gatherers because their size were smaller, they had an environment where they could just move on to get fed. The important thing was to keep the members healthy and cooperative. But if we would not accomplish more than that, we would not have nice commodities, like more than a set or two of clothes (especially warm ones), a comfortable bed and not something you can bring around, we would not have bathrooms, we would not have something for heating that is not chopping wood, coal or sheep dung. (it was spelling error on the phone) We may have a nicely decorated, carved flute, but not a piano or a violin. We may have a nice tent that keeps the winds away, easier to carry, but not a cathedral. Etc... Many people think that they want to live like that, without knowing how hard it can be. They romanticize it without ever have to know the smell you may have to overcome that comes with this lifestyle. (Not just body odors, but your not vegetarian cooking, the animals that you live with and so many other things. Life is not just hard, but can be very stinky without commodities) They don't know that it is romantic and macho to be chopping up a whole tree for the day, but when you actually want to do something more creative than that, you may have no time until it is winter and you are unable to work outside. Then you may not feeling up to learn or compose a new song on your flute because the last season your vegetable garden suffered from drought and your 5 children are hungry. One, the youngest one, because he is not as strong yet and more sensitive to things like hunger, he got sick and you are stressing if he will have a turn for the better... etc. People have so little understanding, empathy and imagination to make sense how hard it may have been. They have absolute no gratitude for the whole history of our species and their deep suffering to get here where we are. Because it got much more complicated, we don't understand that having people in position needs more than one who thinks he is the best. We don't need someone who are unable to understand that to keep being alive, is more than power, more than ruthlessness and personal will. We need leaders who know that we are although very "big", too big unfortunately will fail too. It is not about narcissism, but wisdom what we are looking for because it is still about life and death. Our brain is having hard time computing the dangers because we had such of growth spur that we can't do the computing. Our clans have grown so much that we don't really know what that person really doing and who he is when he is not on the screen. So we choose people who can talk the way we like him to talk, not the way we need him to tell us what we have to sacrifice as a society to make sure we live the best possible life we can manage at our circumstances. Because consequences are delayed, nobody cares to take responsibility for it, and we keep people in position accordingly how they can tell us what we want to hear. Absolutely not because we want to hear the inconveniencing truth. We don't care about character, dignity or even their ability to do their jobs. We want them to make sure they represent them, not all the community. We don't even know who are the community. We don't know if they are unreasonably suffering, we don't know if they are working hard or not. It is easier to think: they are not so smart, they are lazy, they are doing the wrong things (but never mind any way, I am just here for myself). They can't comprehend that actually, if we do this long enough, they themselves will suffer the consequences. There is only one earth.
2.15 if correct means it is perfectly fine to sell drugs as it makes me better off, and I make others better off with bribes. Therefore any I care about are ok.
@@solaveritas2 I've known demons. They all refer to life in this world as "a game" (complete with PCs and NPCs). That's how they try to justify suicide and assisted suicide, it's all about "fun"/pleasure/hedonism with them. And I know God regards morality and earthly life very, very differently, because in the midst of their strong-arm attempt to indoctrinate me, I asked God and was given His response.
"Evolution of Trust". Search for it and play it. It is an eye opener and so well done. A little game that visualized the concept. Really really good.
Modern day hero’s. I can’t get enough of these guys. Brilliant 👍
Oh, again I was reminded of that I _again_ had forgotten that you play games in life, not to win _every_ game, but to get invited to more games, and to win some of those. But it is a difficult choice.
and you don't play with people who rather cheat than do the right thing. That would be stupid. If you are going to play with someone who screwed you up multiple times, in multiple cases: you should run away from them. They are not poker players. They are the mafia. They own the casino. They rather win relentlessly and take you out if you outplay them. You don't want to "play" with them even when they invite you. Not just because their dirty games cost you too much money or because you have too little left. They are just out for that last couple of cent and have no intent to "play nice". Too dirty to play.
Sorry... Maybe I was too vague. I don't have enough education to express myself properly. Maybe this quote will be helpful:
“There's an old saying in Tennessee - I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee - that says, fool me once, shame on - shame on you. Fool me - you can't get fooled again.”
― George W. Bush
It is not really a difficult choice once you realise that getting invited to the game is winning the actual game.
I always liked playing video games with my little brother (2 years younger). As a kid I usually won and gloated about it and he would get mad and we wouldn't play again for a long time. It wasn't until I was a young adult that I realized that if I wanted him to keep playing with me, I needed to let him have fun, too, and win sometimes. Then my "game" became how to make sure both of us have fun.
@@jlhill17 Yes, that's it. Fun = Win!
Beautifully put.
The Gulag Archipelago chilling in the background. Good hint Mr Peterson, good hint.
He actually wrote the Forward in that edition of the Gulag Archipelago, it is quite good.
A good hint of what?
Fascinating gentlemen, thank you. This looks like a clip from something else, who is this gentleman Dr. Peterson is talking to?
Matt Ridley wrote The Rational Optimist which is a fantastic book and argues that the world/humanity is in the best place it’s ever been across a bunch of different measures and it looks like it’s only going to keep getting better if we can avoid f$&@ing it up.
th-cam.com/video/OLHh9E5ilZ4/w-d-xo.html
@@lanagordon5669 yeppp. The problem is that it is already f@cked. You just have to spend time looking at the evidence. One was the amount of destructions fires are causing these days. The intensity, temperature, size of the land can't be compared to the ones from the past. Instead of being optimistic, you really have to make sure you are open minded and try to understand all the data that you have to compute to see the outcome. You have to make sure you are listening to those also, who are less optimistic and they really know their fields. Optimism is not enough because the price of the error is too much.
Great insight.
I love your work
ooo... not very opinionated! Good for you! It takes time to gather information for your opinion if your goal is to have a strong base for it. It saves so much time to just take the side that it is already fits your vague ideas. What a waste of time arguing about points if nobody really here to make points, only to have an environment where they can feel safe and not pressured into debates, no hard decisions and bad feelings if you may found out things are different, they have changed since the last time you checked. Believe me, it is time consuming an unpopular to be an asshole who holds the mirror. (This is again, sarcasm. I know why! I had spent so much time of my own, I have been called all the names you can imagine just because I have an opinion and I look into it what is the newest science about the subject. I am frustrated & resentful. Why didn't I stopped it and kept it to myself? I should have been doing this me & "my immediate interest first" thing & someone else can do the research if they care.)
@@tahwsisiht ?
@@tahwsisiht wtf
Long run better than the short term.
Is anyone else not able to see the video in the description? Link says the video is private.
🔥
The problem is when someone is not intelligent enough to see that certain things look like it cost him money (like tax) today, but not spending money on it will cause more problems for himself too. Also, looking at providing education and healthcare as an expense, instead of thinking about it as an investment is shortsightedness. Waiting for someone else to invest money in the economy and be the one who is benefiting from it is mostly what is happening these days. It seems like nobody gets it. If we stretch our taxes as much as it makes sense to pull people up, we creates customers who can shop for things more expensive than only their daily bread. Creating opportunity for them to become the best version of themselves make them more educated, doing more complex things than what you will be able to get hired for after high school. Employers don't have to pay an arm and a leg for special jobs because there is not only 1 or 2 candidates in the job market but 20. The 20 candidates have to make sure that they keep up with new information and education to be the one that gets hired. The more complex, the bigger is your business, the more employee you need with education. The bigger the company, more the owner can benefit from his employees work. From the employers side, there should be more understanding that they are benefiting not only from their educated employees, but from a heathy economy too. It is not only their own geniousity that they can run a carpet cleaning business (simple example, I didn't want to complicate it as to run a private lab or factory).
Because someone went to school, they were able to learn engineering and all kinds of science. People have been trying to improve the quality of the carpet cleaner machine's work. It is getting better, less time to clean a room, more efficient, less water, less soap etc... Because the price is getting lower (you need also a market to have enough businesses that are buying machines), the work is done faster and cheaper, the company can hire more people. It is not that the owner paid for that personally. It is what the tax supposed to do. To create work force, to create educated people, to create opportunities to us to make things more efficient. The bigger the business the more it needs these from a modern society, the more he can benefit from our collective achievements. If it would be only about him, if he has absolutely no responsibility to the community and to others: he would be a cotton farmer who lives off the hard work of the slaves. It would be about how much more you can abuse your slaves, how much you don't care about other human beings and their family. I also understand the opposite side too. It makes sense that someone is able to be more organized, willing to work harder than the rest. I am not promoting ONLY the left. But today, (and in the history of our systems when they were creating and improving quality of life) we usually like to praise the one who owns the company and we disregard the one's work who makes the dreams happen. It is a dance of the two truths and the changing environment, our never ending human creativity. If we are intelligent as a human species, we can dance. If not, it is like street fight. Even worse because at least if it is a street fight, one has the chance to win. The fighters don't need more than their physical strength. We need to be doing more for our economy, for the future of our children, our spices, the health of our earth and of course all living beings. It should not be that the people who have only the ability to fight it like they are doing UFC are promoted or having them as icons. We need dance teacherS who have different risk worthy ideas that may work for all of us. Not everyone who thinks they are UFC materials are UFC materials. Many are closer to be in the mindset of a slave holder and the one who would end up on the ground if he ever had to only rely on himself with absolutely no supportive environment. But we can't wait for that to be proved. Anyway....
It is not street fight, it is a lovely, exciting dance. You can enjoy it so much, you didn't even notice that you are exhausted and your pantyhose have a run up to who knows where...
Dancing is good for all of us, using a UFC mindset harms all of us. Even the UFC material.
I like dancing... unfortunately not a professional level, only a level that is enough to have fun and to enjoy it.
hmmm.... I'm lovin' it.
th-cam.com/video/A5u7He4J-VA/w-d-xo.html
We should not confuse morals with "position". When we have more narcissists who are looking to be on top with or without having the quality to lead in that field, when they lack the wisdom to see that inequality can go too far, when they confuse creativity, wisdom, leadership with power, the ability to be manipulative and selfish, things can go very wrong: th-cam.com/video/A5u7He4J-VA/w-d-xo.html
I recall an article in Discover magazine back in the early 90's that explored the concept of tit for tat and also tit for two tats. The idea being to turn the other cheek but only once. It was mathematically modeled to show that there was a slight advantage to letting the first transgression slide but to come down hard as hell after the second one. Interesting to hear the discussion decades latter. Still, the game has become so rigged that I have very little tolerance for even tit for tat in today's environment. I think the perception that it's everyone for themselves and there isn't much of a future for many is behind the social violence we are experiencing now.
What on earth are you doing?
I ask him.
Switching peoples license plates.
But why? I ask.
If the cops want to waste my time by throwing me in prison, I’ll waste theirs with something they hate, which is hours of paperwork. He answered.
I felt nauseous.
But what part of causality was so hard or was he choosing to not grasp?
A cops job entails arresting criminals, and he imprisoned because they caught him breaking the law.
Ah, It’s the age old problem, Criminals most often believe they’re innocent even when evidence proves they are not.
Picture human beings as two parts. So when we think an assumption that someone harmed us.
The average person knows assumptions are not based on fact and so comes up with other possibilities. It’s like criminals just believe whatever thought they think, at which point becomes truth.
If they think their innocent they than believe it and so retaliate against the cops.
This is an individualistic morality though. What happens when an individual understands this game rationally and figures that what is best for all people is to not play it that way, just like, lets say, how jesus figured that there was something larger than himself?
You are arguing that there is indeed something called “the false dilemma fallacy”
@@RagTagMonster Hey, I made this comment three years ago. The prisoners dilemma is truly a deep problem. Since I made this comment I have read The Idiot by Fyodor Dostoevsky and I think it is relevant to this issue of doing what is rationally right vs practically right. I truly believe that I will never feel certain about how to answer it.
Is surprising how ignorant JP is about game theory, but I guess I understand now why his position on individualism.
And I meant Evolutionary Game Theory.
Then bring back the sword. I bet you see a lot less attempts at manipulation.
"Self interest" is essential to the morals of the British political philosophy. The American people, in contrast, are always concerned with the interest of others.
I am not sure where have you been. Or how aware of the history this country has. Concerning others happens more where they are in smaller groups, there are waste territories where they can roam. The size of the group, clan are such that the existing hierarchy works by sheer understanding that if the position is filled up with someone who is not capable, the whole community suffers. It is question of life and death, so people choose the most capable of the group. It worked well with hunter gatherers because their size were smaller, they had an environment where they could just move on to get fed. The important thing was to keep the members healthy and cooperative. But if we would not accomplish more than that, we would not have nice commodities, like more than a set or two of clothes (especially warm ones), a comfortable bed and not something you can bring around, we would not have bathrooms, we would not have something for heating that is not chopping wood, coal or sheep dung. (it was spelling error on the phone) We may have a nicely decorated, carved flute, but not a piano or a violin. We may have a nice tent that keeps the winds away, easier to carry, but not a cathedral. Etc...
Many people think that they want to live like that, without knowing how hard it can be. They romanticize it without ever have to know the smell you may have to overcome that comes with this lifestyle. (Not just body odors, but your not vegetarian cooking, the animals that you live with and so many other things. Life is not just hard, but can be very stinky without commodities) They don't know that it is romantic and macho to be chopping up a whole tree for the day, but when you actually want to do something more creative than that, you may have no time until it is winter and you are unable to work outside. Then you may not feeling up to learn or compose a new song on your flute because the last season your vegetable garden suffered from drought and your 5 children are hungry. One, the youngest one, because he is not as strong yet and more sensitive to things like hunger, he got sick and you are stressing if he will have a turn for the better... etc.
People have so little understanding, empathy and imagination to make sense how hard it may have been. They have absolute no gratitude for the whole history of our species and their deep suffering to get here where we are.
Because it got much more complicated, we don't understand that having people in position needs more than one who thinks he is the best. We don't need someone who are unable to understand that to keep being alive, is more than power, more than ruthlessness and personal will. We need leaders who know that we are although very "big", too big unfortunately will fail too. It is not about narcissism, but wisdom what we are looking for because it is still about life and death. Our brain is having hard time computing the dangers because we had such of growth spur that we can't do the computing. Our clans have grown so much that we don't really know what that person really doing and who he is when he is not on the screen. So we choose people who can talk the way we like him to talk, not the way we need him to tell us what we have to sacrifice as a society to make sure we live the best possible life we can manage at our circumstances. Because consequences are delayed, nobody cares to take responsibility for it, and we keep people in position accordingly how they can tell us what we want to hear. Absolutely not because we want to hear the inconveniencing truth. We don't care about character, dignity or even their ability to do their jobs. We want them to make sure they represent them, not all the community. We don't even know who are the community. We don't know if they are unreasonably suffering, we don't know if they are working hard or not. It is easier to think: they are not so smart, they are lazy, they are doing the wrong things (but never mind any way, I am just here for myself). They can't comprehend that actually, if we do this long enough, they themselves will suffer the consequences. There is only one earth.
😶
Read all these books and doesn't understand the prisoners dilemma...
2.15 if correct means it is perfectly fine to sell drugs as it makes me better off, and I make others better off with bribes. Therefore any I care about are ok.
What are your thoughts about the most translated person in history of America. Ellen G White.
First comment
MR PETERSON. WHAT DO YOU THINK OF THE MOST TRANSLATED WOMAN AUTHER IN THE WORLD, ELLEN WHITE's WRITING.
That's a very demonic perspective on the matter of morality and life in this world...
Why?
@@solaveritas2 I've known demons. They all refer to life in this world as "a game" (complete with PCs and NPCs). That's how they try to justify suicide and assisted suicide, it's all about "fun"/pleasure/hedonism with them. And I know God regards morality and earthly life very, very differently, because in the midst of their strong-arm attempt to indoctrinate me, I asked God and was given His response.
@@solaveritas2 th-cam.com/video/A5u7He4J-VA/w-d-xo.html