3 ms·
For me, it's coming down to a fundamental difference or distinction: Those who believe in a zero-sum-gain world, and those who believe in a net-sum-gain world.
by pasbesoin 10y ago
For me, it's coming down to a fundamental difference or distinction: Those who believe in a zero-sum-gain world, and those who believe in a net-sum-gain world.
I fall into the latter camp. In other words, I believe that by sharing and cooperating, we all can advance.
And, I find myself increasingly thinking and experiencing that the zero-sum-gainers are my opposition. They take as much as they can get away with, and they give as little as they can get away with.
Personal advancement, versus communal.
I can't cooperate with them.
And, I no longer want to engage with them.
I cannot afford to do things that lend or provide them power. For it is only ever turned against me, to leverage further advantage.
Now... for "the community" to come to realize this, and act upon it.
- ikeyany 10y ago> For me, it's coming down to a fundamental difference or distinction: Those who believe in a zero-sum-gain world, and those who believe in a net-sum-gain world. I fall into the latter camp. In other words, I believe that by sharing and cooperating, we all can advance. People like to say this, but they are only okay with sharing things they approve of. By your logic, aren't you morally obligated to let me have something of yours if I ask for it? I'm not criticizing cooperation, just the idealism that falls apart in practice. The best course of action is a complex blend of the two camps you mentioned.
- dredmorbius 10y agoIt depends on how you ask, what you're using it for, and of course, the reciprocal obligation on you to assist others, on request.