4 ms·

Is money really an end for anyone? People seem to have more interesting terminal goals: to win, to live in a well-regarded area, to have financial security in t

by strken 10y ago

Is money really an end for anyone? People seem to have more interesting terminal goals: to win, to live in a well-regarded area, to have financial security in tough times, to get paid "what they're worth", to own nice things, to travel, to get to the front of the pack, to retire early, etc. Those aren't necessarily very good goals, but they're more complicated and much harder to do away with than just lust for money.

Cyph0n 10y ago
The majority of what you listed sounds to me like it would be motivated by a lust for money.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
Razengan 10y ago
> to "win" ... to get to the "front of the pack" etc. and "making money" are all pretty much man-made measures of social success and self-worth, which would be meaningless in a post-scarcity society. I mean, in some cultures, "winning" included having a large number of wives and slaves. In today's world, someone with such achievements would be out of place and seen as archaic. What does it mean to "get to the front of the pack" when everybody can have [figuratively] everything and nobody needs to work? Instead, success would (hopefully) be defined by what you can create and discover, or how many people you can entertain.
- 77pt77 10y ago
  > "making money" are all pretty much man-made measures of social success and self-worth, which would be meaningless in a post-scarcity society. It's actually at the very end just a proxy for mating value, like this article clearly explores.
- the_gipsy 10y ago
  > Instead, success would (probably) be defined by what you can create and discover, or how many people you can entertain. That has actually already happened. Current marketing focuses strongly on enjoying non-expensive but creative lifestyle, instead of showing off wealth.
- Sharlin 10y ago
  "Winning" and "getting to the front of the pack" would definitely still be relevant in a post-scarcity society. Material wealth would just stop being a proxy for those (although some forms of material wealth would always be scarce and usable as status signals, eg. unique works of art).
  - intended 10y ago
    There is no post scarcity society without a post enlightened society. Theres far too many people who will look at someone without a job and say "work harder, you moocher", and then argue using first order logic without any facts or context to say that all safety nets should be taken away to ensure that people dont become sloth like. Add to that, the manipulation of the media, and manipulation by the media and you have the perfect constraints to ensure that people there will never be a post scarcity society.
j2bax 10y ago
Maybe for regular Joes like you and me. But do you think the ultra rich are still just trying to buy comfort and things with the heaps of money they store up?

by strken 10y ago

Cyph0n 10y ago

The majority of what you listed sounds to me like it would be motivated by a lust for money.

deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

Razengan 10y ago

> to "win" ... to get to the "front of the pack" etc. and "making money" are all pretty much man-made measures of social success and self-worth, which would be meaningless in a post-scarcity society. I mean, in some cultures, "winning" included having a large number of wives and slaves. In today's world, someone with such achievements would be out of place and seen as archaic. What does it mean to "get to the front of the pack" when everybody can have [figuratively] everything and nobody needs to work? Instead, success would (hopefully) be defined by what you can create and discover, or how many people you can entertain.

77pt77 10y ago
> "making money" are all pretty much man-made measures of social success and self-worth, which would be meaningless in a post-scarcity society. It's actually at the very end just a proxy for mating value, like this article clearly explores.
the_gipsy 10y ago
> Instead, success would (probably) be defined by what you can create and discover, or how many people you can entertain. That has actually already happened. Current marketing focuses strongly on enjoying non-expensive but creative lifestyle, instead of showing off wealth.
Sharlin 10y ago
"Winning" and "getting to the front of the pack" would definitely still be relevant in a post-scarcity society. Material wealth would just stop being a proxy for those (although some forms of material wealth would always be scarce and usable as status signals, eg. unique works of art).
- intended 10y ago
  There is no post scarcity society without a post enlightened society. Theres far too many people who will look at someone without a job and say "work harder, you moocher", and then argue using first order logic without any facts or context to say that all safety nets should be taken away to ensure that people dont become sloth like. Add to that, the manipulation of the media, and manipulation by the media and you have the perfect constraints to ensure that people there will never be a post scarcity society.

j2bax 10y ago

Maybe for regular Joes like you and me. But do you think the ultra rich are still just trying to buy comfort and things with the heaps of money they store up?