3 ms·

> The problem with aiming for utopia is you don’t understand the problems. I have never found that to be a "problem with aiming for utopia", so maybe it's pure

> The problem with aiming for utopia is you don’t understand the problems. I have never found that to be a "problem with aiming for utopia", so maybe it's purely a personal problem with your ability to aim. Achieving something slightly better is possible whether you're aiming for "something slightly better" or something more, so it's not like aiming high affects your ability to achieve low (it definitely doesn't). As for understanding the situation, etc., that all comes with what I was saying before, which is that criticism should be aimed at where it can affect change. If you can't effect change with criticism, the criticism is counterproductive.

Retric 3y ago
Politically revolutions are probably the best example where people fought really hard to improve things wholesale and then ended up with Mow, Stalin, Pol Pot, etc. Aiming for Utopia has a terrible track record because we don’t actually know how such societies would function under the hood just superficial details that seem like a good idea. What seems like perfection from far away is often premature optimization. Smaller changes may not work, but they are much easier to roll back. This isn’t simply criticism for criticism’s sake there real lessons to be learned here and concrete steps we can take. See the constitutional amendment banning alcohol and then it’s repeal and then repeating those mistakes with the drug war. etc etc
- ImPostingOnHN 3y ago
  I haven't found any of your claims to be true. Aiming for utopia is how we've achieved literally everything as humans from cavemen to now. Though you're cherry picking the worst of humanity, the best of humanity also came from aiming for utopia. Indeed, all the terrible rulers you mentioned could have been from people not aiming for utopia. Larger aims may not be achievable, but they're how we get smaller changes. There is indeed criticism for criticism's sake (a lot of people use it to distract from improvement efforts). If we stick with that, we'd never have repealed prohibition because people would be worried about, "what if we repealed it the wrong way, we shouldn't aim for a utopia where alcohol prohibition is repealed, we should aim for something smaller, like 1% beer, repealing prohibition is just a utopia we'll never achieve". Welp, turns out aiming for the utopia is how we repealed prohibition. We imagined the world we wanted, and we made a part of it happen, and none of it was due to criticizing other countries. Let's just take as an example, a criticism you have of a different country. You can come up with the example. Just explain how your criticism has lead to making our own country better than it was. Remember: that's the only valid positive use of criticism: improving our reality.
  - Retric 3y ago
    > Aiming for utopia is how we’ve achieved literally everything as humans from cavemen to now. That’s objectively false. Many advancements have come from people aiming for personal prestige, wealth, or a host of lesser goals. Even ugly things like coercion have played a major role in moving humanity forward. The raw materials for the Industrial Revolution were often sourced from less than ethical approaches. Utopia just isn’t what motivates most people to do most things, it’s lesser goals like lunch or impressing some girl at a party. On the other hand Utopia is often sold as an excuse for people to do unpleasant things today for some future reward. Cults thrive on Utopia, society runs on more concrete objectives. > Welp, turns out aiming for the utopia is how we repealed prohibition. False. Many people who worked to repeal prohibition still thought the world would be better without alcohol, you can read people who actually argued this, they just didn’t know how to make it work. By giving up on perfection they achieved a beneficial change. Again society is really complex. It’s likely some rule to be part of a perfect society and doing the opposite to be an improvement today. Euthanasia wouldn’t be part of a perfect society because there wouldn’t be pain or suffering in a perfect society. It’s a compromise and an important one. > Let's just take as an example, a criticism you have of a different country. You can come up with the example. Just explain how your criticism has lead to making our own country better than it was. Remember: that's the only valid positive use of criticism: improving our reality. I don’t run things. But if you want a real example of a criticism benefiting the USA, how about giving women the right to vote.
    - ImPostingOnHN 3y ago
      > Many advancements have come from people aiming for personal prestige, wealth, or a host of lesser goals Those are all personal utopias of the people involved. Beyond that, many advancements have come from people aiming for explicitly societal utopias. > Many people who worked to repeal prohibition still thought the world would be better without alcohol, you can read people who actually argued this, they just didn’t know how to make it work. By giving up on perfection they achieved a beneficial change. Perhaps, perhaps not. Many people believed the utopia of a repealed prohibition was unachievable. It was only by ignoring these "utopia shunners" that we achieved that aspect of the utopia we set out to achieve, with prohibition repealed. Again, society is truly complex. It's only by aiming for the better that we get better. Just take, for example, your inability to cite an example of how criticizing another country has led to you improving yours. That just proves my point: it likely hasn't, because it usually doesn't. Indeed, we've completely abandoned that claim, and are now reduced to a claim about utopian vs subutopian goals, entirely omitting anything about other countries. By doing so, we're now discussing how to improve ours. QED.

Retric 3y ago

Politically revolutions are probably the best example where people fought really hard to improve things wholesale and then ended up with Mow, Stalin, Pol Pot, etc. Aiming for Utopia has a terrible track record because we don’t actually know how such societies would function under the hood just superficial details that seem like a good idea. What seems like perfection from far away is often premature optimization. Smaller changes may not work, but they are much easier to roll back. This isn’t simply criticism for criticism’s sake there real lessons to be learned here and concrete steps we can take. See the constitutional amendment banning alcohol and then it’s repeal and then repeating those mistakes with the drug war. etc etc

ImPostingOnHN 3y ago
I haven't found any of your claims to be true. Aiming for utopia is how we've achieved literally everything as humans from cavemen to now. Though you're cherry picking the worst of humanity, the best of humanity also came from aiming for utopia. Indeed, all the terrible rulers you mentioned could have been from people not aiming for utopia. Larger aims may not be achievable, but they're how we get smaller changes. There is indeed criticism for criticism's sake (a lot of people use it to distract from improvement efforts). If we stick with that, we'd never have repealed prohibition because people would be worried about, "what if we repealed it the wrong way, we shouldn't aim for a utopia where alcohol prohibition is repealed, we should aim for something smaller, like 1% beer, repealing prohibition is just a utopia we'll never achieve". Welp, turns out aiming for the utopia is how we repealed prohibition. We imagined the world we wanted, and we made a part of it happen, and none of it was due to criticizing other countries. Let's just take as an example, a criticism you have of a different country. You can come up with the example. Just explain how your criticism has lead to making our own country better than it was. Remember: that's the only valid positive use of criticism: improving our reality.
- Retric 3y ago
  > Aiming for utopia is how we’ve achieved literally everything as humans from cavemen to now. That’s objectively false. Many advancements have come from people aiming for personal prestige, wealth, or a host of lesser goals. Even ugly things like coercion have played a major role in moving humanity forward. The raw materials for the Industrial Revolution were often sourced from less than ethical approaches. Utopia just isn’t what motivates most people to do most things, it’s lesser goals like lunch or impressing some girl at a party. On the other hand Utopia is often sold as an excuse for people to do unpleasant things today for some future reward. Cults thrive on Utopia, society runs on more concrete objectives. > Welp, turns out aiming for the utopia is how we repealed prohibition. False. Many people who worked to repeal prohibition still thought the world would be better without alcohol, you can read people who actually argued this, they just didn’t know how to make it work. By giving up on perfection they achieved a beneficial change. Again society is really complex. It’s likely some rule to be part of a perfect society and doing the opposite to be an improvement today. Euthanasia wouldn’t be part of a perfect society because there wouldn’t be pain or suffering in a perfect society. It’s a compromise and an important one. > Let's just take as an example, a criticism you have of a different country. You can come up with the example. Just explain how your criticism has lead to making our own country better than it was. Remember: that's the only valid positive use of criticism: improving our reality. I don’t run things. But if you want a real example of a criticism benefiting the USA, how about giving women the right to vote.
  - ImPostingOnHN 3y ago
    > Many advancements have come from people aiming for personal prestige, wealth, or a host of lesser goals Those are all personal utopias of the people involved. Beyond that, many advancements have come from people aiming for explicitly societal utopias. > Many people who worked to repeal prohibition still thought the world would be better without alcohol, you can read people who actually argued this, they just didn’t know how to make it work. By giving up on perfection they achieved a beneficial change. Perhaps, perhaps not. Many people believed the utopia of a repealed prohibition was unachievable. It was only by ignoring these "utopia shunners" that we achieved that aspect of the utopia we set out to achieve, with prohibition repealed. Again, society is truly complex. It's only by aiming for the better that we get better. Just take, for example, your inability to cite an example of how criticizing another country has led to you improving yours. That just proves my point: it likely hasn't, because it usually doesn't. Indeed, we've completely abandoned that claim, and are now reduced to a claim about utopian vs subutopian goals, entirely omitting anything about other countries. By doing so, we're now discussing how to improve ours. QED.