4 ms·

I totally agree with you. I've thought about this as well. Most of the folks I know in bad situations had some early stumbles and they sort of just gave up, a

by eric_b 9y ago

I totally agree with you. I've thought about this as well. Most of the folks I know in bad situations had some early stumbles and they sort of just gave up, as you say. The thing is - and where I struggle - is that the early stumbles weren't insurmountable. It's like they had no fire, no tenacity, no will power.

eli_gottlieb 9y ago
Fire, tenacity, and willpower for... what, exactly? Towards what end? Why should everyone have to play ubermensch just to survive?
- eric_b 9y ago
  Because that's how nature works? Because it's naive to think we've evolved so far that we are no longer subject to natural forces and evolutionary history?
  - eli_gottlieb 9y ago
    So farmers have spent thousands of years of civilization valiantly striving to out-ubermensch each-other, and the rest of us just never heard about it? Shepherds? Priests? Scientists? Artists and writers? Shit, how have I missed the evolutionary war of all against all going on all around me? There are so many gene-rivals I could have stabbed in back-alleys! Or does evolution maybe allow for successful strategies towards survival and reproduction that don't neatly map to metaphors about war?
    - eric_b 9y ago
      Oh please, you're propping up a strawman. You don't need to be an "ubermensch" to survive, and that's not at all what I'm saying. I'm saying you can't expect to be lazy and make bad choices and also expect to have as much as someone who works hard and makes smart choices. That was my point regarding evolutionary history and nature. Farmers that worked hard and planned ahead did better than those who did nothing. Those that bought crop insurance or fastidiously watched the weather were in a better position to succeed than those who didn't. Similar scenarios abound for your other examples. No matter how much you wish otherwise, nature (and our society) is set up for certain kind of animals/people to succeed - and if you wilfully choose to ignore the system that's fine, but don't be mad when it doesn't work out great for you.
      - eli_gottlieb 9y ago
        I don't wish. I put my efforts into overthrowing your so-called "natural" order. Nature, after all, is merely everything compatible with the laws of physics. If we create a universal basic income, or pass living-wage laws, those are natural!
        theandrewbailey 9y ago
        While UBI and living wage laws are compatible with physics, they are not part of nature. UBI and living wage laws are human rules, and nature will do whatever it wants. Humans have nature, too, and no amount of laws or rules will stop human nature. Until human beings become something else, always bet on it. Giving them more resources (e.g. money) tends to make things worse for them.
      - seasharp 9y ago
        Strawman? His question was why is it necessary for everyone to be an ubermensch and your response not one message before his said "Because that's how nature works[.]" Unless you meant to write something completely different, that's your stance and he rebutted it
      - tuukkah 9y ago
        "our society is set up for certain kind of people to succeed - but don't be mad when it doesn't work out great for you." Here's the mistake in your thinking as a society can be set up to be fair or unfair. However, a society can be changed and does change. It's fine to be mad at unfairness, it's fine to fight unfairness via societal changes.
  - Frondo 9y ago
    The minute we collectively stopped stronger folks than you and me from beating us up and taking our stuff, we left the realm of "how nature works". In the west, we're all living in rich enough countries that no one should need superhuman will or fire or tenacity simply to live a decent life. No one willing to work 40 hours a week should be denied access to the medical care system, face food or housing insecurity, etc. The fact that that is the situation for many speaks to problems in the way we've arranged society (which is about as far from "how nature works" as possible), not some innate rightness in the world.
    - douche 9y ago
      > No one willing to work 40 hours a week Quite often that's the problem. Particularly if we've built up a palace of perverse incentives that make it a better strategy to coast along on the byzantine web of social services that is effectively an inefficient Basic Income for people at the bottom of the pile, than it is to get a shitty job and make just enough money to lose all those benefits. I can't really blame people that realize that that's the situation they face, though.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]

by eric_b 9y ago

eli_gottlieb 9y ago

Fire, tenacity, and willpower for... what, exactly? Towards what end? Why should everyone have to play ubermensch just to survive?

eric_b 9y ago
Because that's how nature works? Because it's naive to think we've evolved so far that we are no longer subject to natural forces and evolutionary history?
- eli_gottlieb 9y ago
  So farmers have spent thousands of years of civilization valiantly striving to out-ubermensch each-other, and the rest of us just never heard about it? Shepherds? Priests? Scientists? Artists and writers? Shit, how have I missed the evolutionary war of all against all going on all around me? There are so many gene-rivals I could have stabbed in back-alleys! Or does evolution maybe allow for successful strategies towards survival and reproduction that don't neatly map to metaphors about war?
  - eric_b 9y ago
    Oh please, you're propping up a strawman. You don't need to be an "ubermensch" to survive, and that's not at all what I'm saying. I'm saying you can't expect to be lazy and make bad choices and also expect to have as much as someone who works hard and makes smart choices. That was my point regarding evolutionary history and nature. Farmers that worked hard and planned ahead did better than those who did nothing. Those that bought crop insurance or fastidiously watched the weather were in a better position to succeed than those who didn't. Similar scenarios abound for your other examples. No matter how much you wish otherwise, nature (and our society) is set up for certain kind of animals/people to succeed - and if you wilfully choose to ignore the system that's fine, but don't be mad when it doesn't work out great for you.
    - eli_gottlieb 9y ago
      I don't wish. I put my efforts into overthrowing your so-called "natural" order. Nature, after all, is merely everything compatible with the laws of physics. If we create a universal basic income, or pass living-wage laws, those are natural!
      - theandrewbailey 9y ago
        While UBI and living wage laws are compatible with physics, they are not part of nature. UBI and living wage laws are human rules, and nature will do whatever it wants. Humans have nature, too, and no amount of laws or rules will stop human nature. Until human beings become something else, always bet on it. Giving them more resources (e.g. money) tends to make things worse for them.
    - seasharp 9y ago
      Strawman? His question was why is it necessary for everyone to be an ubermensch and your response not one message before his said "Because that's how nature works[.]" Unless you meant to write something completely different, that's your stance and he rebutted it
    - tuukkah 9y ago
      "our society is set up for certain kind of people to succeed - but don't be mad when it doesn't work out great for you." Here's the mistake in your thinking as a society can be set up to be fair or unfair. However, a society can be changed and does change. It's fine to be mad at unfairness, it's fine to fight unfairness via societal changes.
- Frondo 9y ago
  The minute we collectively stopped stronger folks than you and me from beating us up and taking our stuff, we left the realm of "how nature works". In the west, we're all living in rich enough countries that no one should need superhuman will or fire or tenacity simply to live a decent life. No one willing to work 40 hours a week should be denied access to the medical care system, face food or housing insecurity, etc. The fact that that is the situation for many speaks to problems in the way we've arranged society (which is about as far from "how nature works" as possible), not some innate rightness in the world.
  - douche 9y ago
    > No one willing to work 40 hours a week Quite often that's the problem. Particularly if we've built up a palace of perverse incentives that make it a better strategy to coast along on the byzantine web of social services that is effectively an inefficient Basic Income for people at the bottom of the pile, than it is to get a shitty job and make just enough money to lose all those benefits. I can't really blame people that realize that that's the situation they face, though.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]