3 ms·
I felt the same way on first reading, but then decided that I misinterpreted "someone" to mean "someone really close to me": spouse, kids, parents, etc. This is
by ptero 8y ago
I felt the same way on first reading, but then decided that I misinterpreted "someone" to mean "someone really close to me": spouse, kids, parents, etc. This is similar to buying things for myself.
I believe in MF quote "someone" is better described as "someone you do not personally know or maybe see once". A model for that is buying a gift for a Yankee Swap party. Or for a child I do not know: something to cheer them up, but as I do not know if (s)he likes dolls or trucks I can go with a safe, generic choice, e.g., a book.
That is, I am still trying to do a good thing, but am not too worried that I will guess incorrectly.
- Retra 8y agoSeems that this is the problem empathy was meant to solve.
- ptero 8y agoI am not sure I understand. My claim is the situation where you spend your money on someone else is not that "I do not care" (which the empathy can help solve), but "I do not know", so I will make an optimal choice: decent gift at reasonable cost; paying more can give poor ROI since I do not know what exactly to spend more money on.
- Retra 8y agoWhat I'm saying is that empathy is completely useless... other than the fact that it allows you to turn "someone I don't care about" into "someone I don't know, but care about enough to make meaningful sacrifices for." So the whole point of empathy is that it allows you to avoid a frame of mind where you're spending other peoples' money on things that don't benefit anybody.