4 ms·

"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the u

by scrrr 15y ago

"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man."

coldarchon 15y ago
.. and all sustainability on the reasonable man.
Mansyn 15y ago
I enjoy thought provoking arguments as much as the next guy, but too many people seem like they just want something to be unreasonable about. And they act like children, in that they only scrutinize the process when their not getting their way. They just want to be a malcontent, and it appears pathetic to me. I'll be first in line when there's a revolution that isn't full of drum circles and free-loaders.
- itmag 15y ago
  Exactly. In Transactional Analysis, they would say that those types view themselves as ill-behaved Children and identify society as the Parent. The mature dissident (the Adult) looks very different from this, and is a lot more effective too. More on TA: http://changingminds.org/explanations/behaviors/ta.htm http://changingminds.org/explanations/behaviors/ta.htm
- nknight 15y ago
  When else would you analyze a process than when it's causing you a problem? Do you routinely attempt to fix things that aren't broken?
  - rprospero 15y ago
    Imagine that you find an ATM machine that's spitting out free money. It's certainly not causing you a problem, but that doesn't mean that it's not broken. It's easy to see that the system is broken when you're getting less than you deserve. It takes a degree of maturity to admit that the system is broken when you receive more than you deserve.
    - nknight 15y ago
      Uh, it's also not my job to go over to the ATM and find out why it's broken. On the contrary, trying to do so would probably get me arrested. I have no reason to fix or even analyze a process until it is somehow relevant to me. Calling me immature because I decline to go hunting for problems I otherwise wouldn't even know about is bizarre at best.
      - UnFleshedOne 15y ago
        That is a reasonable position. But only if you wouldn't stuff your pockets full of money should you pass one by while at the same time complaining about all the free-loaders on welfare. I know some people who would do both things without having any cognitive dissonance induced discomfort at all.
        nknight 15y ago
        But that has nothing at all to do with anti-authoritarianism, and doesn't seem to resemble what Mansyn was talking about in any way. I can't stop thinking, while reading his and rprospero's comments, of the stereotypical parent screaming at a fussy eater, "Don't you know there are starving children in Africa?!".
vannevar 15y ago
This is true, but it does not mean that all unreasonable men contribute to progress. Most are wrong, and many are crazy. A few are right. Unfortunately, it's hard for us (and impossible for them) to tell the difference.
- eternalban 15y ago
  It is either a feature or a bug of civilization that it needs ballasts. My speculation regarding this phenomena is that it is an emergent (learned) response -- the collective adaptation has been to ignore outliers until proven correct. The absolute worst case (likely rare) is that a timely alternative viewpoint is ignored - i.e. Cassandras. On the balance, it appears the future collective wins as the validity of the outlier view (which were not that urgent) becomes apparent and the collective majority has developed the ability to adopt it and then the "tortured/rejected/misunderstood genuius" is celebrated after death. Civilizational win, with many individual loses (some entirely undeserved).
TDL 15y ago
Conformity != reasonableness. There are some worlds people should not adapt to, but too many do. Many used this line of thinking on abolitionists in the ante-bellum period to maintain the institution of slavery.
nitrogen 15y ago
Note to sibling comment[0] by coldarchon: It looks like your account is dead, possibly due to this thread: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3145705 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3145705 [0] http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3643094 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3643094
InclinedPlane 15y ago
That cuts both ways though. Every human being is effectively part of someone else's environment. Is forcing another man to adapt to one's purported "authority" also progress?
- ImprovedSilence 15y ago
  I'm just gonna think outloud here, stream of consciousness style, cuz I think this is an interesting debate, and I've reached the end of my usefulness for the day. Here goes: I believe there are several degrees to which "adapting the world to oneself" could apply. You're clearly state an example where one goes too far, but at that point, is the person changed from anti-authoritarian, to THE authoritarian? In general, I see what you are getting at, but I think you are taking parts too literally. Or, at least the way I see it, "kites rise against the wind" is the kind of mentality. Another possible answer to your question: Who is defining progress? Did Hitler "make progress"? Not in our eyes, not it today's society, but would a German from the 30's tell you that? He certainly changed the world, I think we can hold that to fact. I'm just going to spew another quote, cuz my brain just leaks inspirational bumper stickers... "Those crazy enough to think they can change the world, are often those who do."

by scrrr 15y ago

"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the unreasonable man."

coldarchon 15y ago

.. and all sustainability on the reasonable man.

Mansyn 15y ago

I enjoy thought provoking arguments as much as the next guy, but too many people seem like they just want something to be unreasonable about. And they act like children, in that they only scrutinize the process when their not getting their way. They just want to be a malcontent, and it appears pathetic to me. I'll be first in line when there's a revolution that isn't full of drum circles and free-loaders.

itmag 15y ago
Exactly. In Transactional Analysis, they would say that those types view themselves as ill-behaved Children and identify society as the Parent. The mature dissident (the Adult) looks very different from this, and is a lot more effective too. More on TA: http://changingminds.org/explanations/behaviors/ta.htm http://changingminds.org/explanations/behaviors/ta.htm
nknight 15y ago
When else would you analyze a process than when it's causing you a problem? Do you routinely attempt to fix things that aren't broken?
- rprospero 15y ago
  Imagine that you find an ATM machine that's spitting out free money. It's certainly not causing you a problem, but that doesn't mean that it's not broken. It's easy to see that the system is broken when you're getting less than you deserve. It takes a degree of maturity to admit that the system is broken when you receive more than you deserve.
  - nknight 15y ago
    Uh, it's also not my job to go over to the ATM and find out why it's broken. On the contrary, trying to do so would probably get me arrested. I have no reason to fix or even analyze a process until it is somehow relevant to me. Calling me immature because I decline to go hunting for problems I otherwise wouldn't even know about is bizarre at best.
    - UnFleshedOne 15y ago
      That is a reasonable position. But only if you wouldn't stuff your pockets full of money should you pass one by while at the same time complaining about all the free-loaders on welfare. I know some people who would do both things without having any cognitive dissonance induced discomfort at all.
      - nknight 15y ago
        But that has nothing at all to do with anti-authoritarianism, and doesn't seem to resemble what Mansyn was talking about in any way. I can't stop thinking, while reading his and rprospero's comments, of the stereotypical parent screaming at a fussy eater, "Don't you know there are starving children in Africa?!".

vannevar 15y ago

This is true, but it does not mean that all unreasonable men contribute to progress. Most are wrong, and many are crazy. A few are right. Unfortunately, it's hard for us (and impossible for them) to tell the difference.

eternalban 15y ago
It is either a feature or a bug of civilization that it needs ballasts. My speculation regarding this phenomena is that it is an emergent (learned) response -- the collective adaptation has been to ignore outliers until proven correct. The absolute worst case (likely rare) is that a timely alternative viewpoint is ignored - i.e. Cassandras. On the balance, it appears the future collective wins as the validity of the outlier view (which were not that urgent) becomes apparent and the collective majority has developed the ability to adopt it and then the "tortured/rejected/misunderstood genuius" is celebrated after death. Civilizational win, with many individual loses (some entirely undeserved).

TDL 15y ago

Conformity != reasonableness. There are some worlds people should not adapt to, but too many do. Many used this line of thinking on abolitionists in the ante-bellum period to maintain the institution of slavery.

nitrogen 15y ago

Note to sibling comment[0] by coldarchon: It looks like your account is dead, possibly due to this thread: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3145705 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3145705 [0] http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3643094 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3643094

InclinedPlane 15y ago

That cuts both ways though. Every human being is effectively part of someone else's environment. Is forcing another man to adapt to one's purported "authority" also progress?

ImprovedSilence 15y ago
I'm just gonna think outloud here, stream of consciousness style, cuz I think this is an interesting debate, and I've reached the end of my usefulness for the day. Here goes: I believe there are several degrees to which "adapting the world to oneself" could apply. You're clearly state an example where one goes too far, but at that point, is the person changed from anti-authoritarian, to THE authoritarian? In general, I see what you are getting at, but I think you are taking parts too literally. Or, at least the way I see it, "kites rise against the wind" is the kind of mentality. Another possible answer to your question: Who is defining progress? Did Hitler "make progress"? Not in our eyes, not it today's society, but would a German from the 30's tell you that? He certainly changed the world, I think we can hold that to fact. I'm just going to spew another quote, cuz my brain just leaks inspirational bumper stickers... "Those crazy enough to think they can change the world, are often those who do."