3 ms·

Not necessarily. Adults get fat and rot their teeth out too. We like to think that we are making our own choices, but in reality we are largely prisoners of ou

Not necessarily. Adults get fat and rot their teeth out too. We like to think that we are making our own choices, but in reality we are largely prisoners of our genetic programming. Given the choice between broccoli and a marshmallow, well, sure, some people are able to choose the broccoli. But there are strong evolutionary forces that bias us towards choosing the marshmallow every time. And of course the situation is much worse when we are constantly barraged by similar choices in every domain (including media). When we say "people should be able to make their own choices," we pit the superego against the id (for want of better terms). We implicitly take the position that if a person's superego is weaker than their id, that person deserves to fail and suffer. Wouldn't it be better if we could make the path of least resistance also the best choice?

dpark 10y ago
> Wouldn't it be better if we could make the path of least resistance also the best choice? Maybe, but that's a far different question than whether we should ban questionable choices. I'm all for labeling nutrition info. I might be onboard with "sin taxes" on junk food. I'd probably be onboard with restricting advertising on junk food. But I'm in no way in favor of banning marshmallows.
- nemo1618 10y ago
  I agree that ideally, a total ban wouldn't be necessary. For example, in the 1950's (in America), it wasn't illegal to get a divorce, but there was intense social pressure not to. And even if something is illegal, that doesn't necessarily prevent people from acquiring it. It's just not the path of least resistance.
CaptSpify 10y ago
Are you then suggesting that we put these same humans as the decision maker for what is "bad" vs "good"? This cuts both ways, in that I can't trust someone else to dictate what I should or shouldn't consume because they have their own id/superego in conflict when making that decision.
- nemo1618 10y ago
  Generally speaking, laws are inventions of the superego designed to rein in the id when the superego is resting. We practice this on an individual level when our superego sets a goal and commits to it despite the protests of the id. I think the bigger problem with what I suggested is that you have to trust someone else's superego to design good laws.
  - CaptSpify 10y ago
    That's kind of my point. I completely agree that humans are bad about making their own choices, but I don't think that taking choices away from them is the right answer either. IME, better education about those choices, and less pressures about those choices are the solutions.
    - nemo1618 10y ago
      That sounds well and good, but "better education" is a bit hand-wavey, isn't it? When we educate someone, aren't we, in a way, taking away their choice to do certain things? Sure, in principle they can still make completely free choices, but it is often very difficult to deviate from one's programming. Somewhere along the line, someone has to accept the responsibility for programming others. It's simply a fact of being human that your consciousness will be shaped by factors beyond your control. Maybe it's time for us to abandon the ideal of the Unconstrained Man and instead embrace the arbitrary.
balabaster 10y ago
It doesn't help that we're constantly bombarded with advertising for food that has been scientifically formulated for 'maximum bliss' which poisons our mind towards trying and eventually becoming addicted to said foods... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bliss_point_(food) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bliss_point_(food) So it's not entirely our fault.

dpark 10y ago

> Wouldn't it be better if we could make the path of least resistance also the best choice? Maybe, but that's a far different question than whether we should ban questionable choices. I'm all for labeling nutrition info. I might be onboard with "sin taxes" on junk food. I'd probably be onboard with restricting advertising on junk food. But I'm in no way in favor of banning marshmallows.

nemo1618 10y ago
I agree that ideally, a total ban wouldn't be necessary. For example, in the 1950's (in America), it wasn't illegal to get a divorce, but there was intense social pressure not to. And even if something is illegal, that doesn't necessarily prevent people from acquiring it. It's just not the path of least resistance.

CaptSpify 10y ago

Are you then suggesting that we put these same humans as the decision maker for what is "bad" vs "good"? This cuts both ways, in that I can't trust someone else to dictate what I should or shouldn't consume because they have their own id/superego in conflict when making that decision.

nemo1618 10y ago
Generally speaking, laws are inventions of the superego designed to rein in the id when the superego is resting. We practice this on an individual level when our superego sets a goal and commits to it despite the protests of the id. I think the bigger problem with what I suggested is that you have to trust someone else's superego to design good laws.
- CaptSpify 10y ago
  That's kind of my point. I completely agree that humans are bad about making their own choices, but I don't think that taking choices away from them is the right answer either. IME, better education about those choices, and less pressures about those choices are the solutions.
  - nemo1618 10y ago
    That sounds well and good, but "better education" is a bit hand-wavey, isn't it? When we educate someone, aren't we, in a way, taking away their choice to do certain things? Sure, in principle they can still make completely free choices, but it is often very difficult to deviate from one's programming. Somewhere along the line, someone has to accept the responsibility for programming others. It's simply a fact of being human that your consciousness will be shaped by factors beyond your control. Maybe it's time for us to abandon the ideal of the Unconstrained Man and instead embrace the arbitrary.

balabaster 10y ago

It doesn't help that we're constantly bombarded with advertising for food that has been scientifically formulated for 'maximum bliss' which poisons our mind towards trying and eventually becoming addicted to said foods... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bliss_point_(food) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bliss_point_(food) So it's not entirely our fault.