6 ms·

It's telling that the "he deserves it, it's all foresight and brilliance" is the leading reply and the "right skills, right time" reply is behind. I imagine jus

It's telling that the "he deserves it, it's all foresight and brilliance" is the leading reply and the "right skills, right time" reply is behind. I imagine just by sheer nature of the power law that some upvotes are people trying to justify their lot but that would be the minority of people. I guess just so many who haven't made it at all but hold this fiction dear for their own peace of mind?

throwaway2048 6y ago
The Just World Fallacy is an important cornerstone of a lot of people's beliefs about the world. It tends to come out most fervently in strained justifications about such massive and obvious inequalities in compensation, such as this case.
- philh 6y ago
  Whenever someone says "this state of the world is just, because <something you disagree with>", it's easy to say "that's the just world fallacy talking". But it's basically contentless. Really you're just saying that you disagree with the "because", and not explaining why you disagree. I wish people did it less often.
  - throwaway2048 6y ago
    The problem isn't with the explicit statement, which is rarely made. The problem is with the fact "the world is just" is a position they reason from, and seek to defend, often in blatant contradiction to the facts of the situation.
    - philh 6y ago
      I agree some people do that. But not everyone who says "this state of the world is just, because <something you disagree with>" is doing that. How do you tell the people who are doing that apart from the people who just disagree with you in this instance? It seems to me that you're accusing people of a pattern of "mistakenly seeing the world as just". But your only evidence for this is one case of them mistakenly seeing the world as just; and in that case, you haven't even put in the work to show that they're actually mistaken. (edit - for that matter, how many people even think this state of the world is just? From skimming, I can't see anyone explicitly saying it is. The author of the comment that triggered this subthread explicitly disclaims it.)
vijayr02 6y ago
"Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires." ― Ronald Wright, A Short History of Progress
- Roritharr 6y ago
  The flip-side of this truism is that this point of view is probably healthier for the individual than seeing themselves as helpless victims. Both views are flawed, of course.
  - dragonwriter 6y ago
    > The flip-side of this truism is that this point of view is probably healthier for the individual than seeing themselves as helpless victims. That's not the flip side of that view, because the socialist view of an exploited proletariat in an advanced industrial democracy is not one of “helpless victims”, but of a powerful force that has the power to reverse the power structure once they realize it exists and act in solidarity against it.
    - treerock 6y ago
      > socialist view of an exploited proletariat is one of...a powerful force May be mistaken, but historically didn't socialist view proles as a 'lumpen mass', with no real power? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lumpenproletariat https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lumpenproletariat
      - dragonwriter 6y ago
        > May be mistaken, but historically didn't socialist view proles as a 'lumpen mass', No, the lumpenproletariat, in Marxist theory is an underclass beneath and contrasted with the proletariat consisting largely of the unemployable (not due to economic system or structure, or physical capacity, but personal character and inclination), career criminals (of more than mala in se than malum prohibiting sense), and the others who neither make nor are inclined to make a positive contribution to society, and which unlike the proletariat is not viewed as a fertile ground for developing class consciousness and is viewed as a dangerous class at best useless to revolutionary organization of the proletariat, and also having a great potential, largely for pay, to individually be recruited as agents by the bourgeoisie against the proletariat.
philh 6y ago
Without seeing the scores, if the more recent comment is on top, we don't know which has more votes. But in fact, both have been on top at different times. > I imagine just by sheer nature of the power law that some upvotes are people trying to justify their lot but that would be the minority of people. I guess just so many who haven't made it at all but hold this fiction dear for their own peace of mind? What you're doing here is speculating about the motives of an unknown number of people who upvoted a comment. Can you really not think of any other reason they might have done so?
credit_guy 6y ago
It's either that, or some people really believe in the benefit of doubt.

throwaway2048 6y ago

The Just World Fallacy is an important cornerstone of a lot of people's beliefs about the world. It tends to come out most fervently in strained justifications about such massive and obvious inequalities in compensation, such as this case.

philh 6y ago
Whenever someone says "this state of the world is just, because <something you disagree with>", it's easy to say "that's the just world fallacy talking". But it's basically contentless. Really you're just saying that you disagree with the "because", and not explaining why you disagree. I wish people did it less often.
- throwaway2048 6y ago
  The problem isn't with the explicit statement, which is rarely made. The problem is with the fact "the world is just" is a position they reason from, and seek to defend, often in blatant contradiction to the facts of the situation.
  - philh 6y ago
    I agree some people do that. But not everyone who says "this state of the world is just, because <something you disagree with>" is doing that. How do you tell the people who are doing that apart from the people who just disagree with you in this instance? It seems to me that you're accusing people of a pattern of "mistakenly seeing the world as just". But your only evidence for this is one case of them mistakenly seeing the world as just; and in that case, you haven't even put in the work to show that they're actually mistaken. (edit - for that matter, how many people even think this state of the world is just? From skimming, I can't see anyone explicitly saying it is. The author of the comment that triggered this subthread explicitly disclaims it.)

vijayr02 6y ago

"Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires." ― Ronald Wright, A Short History of Progress

Roritharr 6y ago
The flip-side of this truism is that this point of view is probably healthier for the individual than seeing themselves as helpless victims. Both views are flawed, of course.
- dragonwriter 6y ago
  > The flip-side of this truism is that this point of view is probably healthier for the individual than seeing themselves as helpless victims. That's not the flip side of that view, because the socialist view of an exploited proletariat in an advanced industrial democracy is not one of “helpless victims”, but of a powerful force that has the power to reverse the power structure once they realize it exists and act in solidarity against it.
  - treerock 6y ago
    > socialist view of an exploited proletariat is one of...a powerful force May be mistaken, but historically didn't socialist view proles as a 'lumpen mass', with no real power? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lumpenproletariat https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lumpenproletariat
    - dragonwriter 6y ago
      > May be mistaken, but historically didn't socialist view proles as a 'lumpen mass', No, the lumpenproletariat, in Marxist theory is an underclass beneath and contrasted with the proletariat consisting largely of the unemployable (not due to economic system or structure, or physical capacity, but personal character and inclination), career criminals (of more than mala in se than malum prohibiting sense), and the others who neither make nor are inclined to make a positive contribution to society, and which unlike the proletariat is not viewed as a fertile ground for developing class consciousness and is viewed as a dangerous class at best useless to revolutionary organization of the proletariat, and also having a great potential, largely for pay, to individually be recruited as agents by the bourgeoisie against the proletariat.

philh 6y ago

Without seeing the scores, if the more recent comment is on top, we don't know which has more votes. But in fact, both have been on top at different times. > I imagine just by sheer nature of the power law that some upvotes are people trying to justify their lot but that would be the minority of people. I guess just so many who haven't made it at all but hold this fiction dear for their own peace of mind? What you're doing here is speculating about the motives of an unknown number of people who upvoted a comment. Can you really not think of any other reason they might have done so?

credit_guy 6y ago

It's either that, or some people really believe in the benefit of doubt.