4 ms·

The fact that those things are not given up shows that people, at least for now, care about having them. Going back to societies that were very prescriptive of

The fact that those things are not given up shows that people, at least for now, care about having them. Going back to societies that were very prescriptive of what everyone can or cannot have because of some central decision on "need" were not necessarily the nicest places to live in - not sure we should attempt to go there again.

kiba 3y ago
It could just easily shows that people don't have choice. After all, state and local authorities decreed how much parking there should be and how zoning works. Meanwhile, the feds provided funding for an interstate system in which highways destroyed whole neighborhoods in the process. Our choices are shaped by the available options people have, sometime very little choices at all. Given that some countries are richer or poorer than other, and some countries are better at public transits than other, I find it hard to believe that the status quo can be justified by people merely making 'choices'.
- RandomLensman 3y ago
  Perhaps for some things, but, for example, holidays far away are a choice, buying a large house is a choice, buying lots of clothes is a choice.
  - kiba 3y ago
    Perhaps for some things, but, for example, holidays far away are a choice, buying a large house is a choice, buying lots of clothes is a choice. Buying a large house is a 'choice' in the sense that much of middle housing is illegal and that political structures aren't designed to maximize the efficient use of land. There's a reason why Georgism is in vogue these days. buying lots of clothes is a choice. Ah, yes. Powered by a system that is designed to exploit brains for profit. It's like eating junk food is a choice. Or not exercising is a 'choice'. They are useless excuses that justify the status quo rather than empowering us to do something about it.
    - _heimdall 3y ago
      Wait, are you arguing that eating junk food and not exercising aren't really choices? I hope I'm just misreading sarcasm there, but they are very much choices and that itself should be empowering because people can just as easily make a different choice.
      - kiba 3y ago
        I hope I'm just misreading sarcasm there, but they are very much choices and that itself should be empowering because people can just as easily make a different choice. If choice is so easy, anyone can pick up a textbook about mathematics, barring deficiency in cognitive capacity, become knowledgeable about mathematics. That doesn't happen not because people are stupid, but because the task is genuinely hard. If choice is so easy, you would be able to able to choose to not to eat for three days and achieve that. For some people, it is extremely difficult. For others, that is easy. I have experienced both situations. Real freedom, then, is to understand that your own mind has their own cause and effect and how to manipulate that to achieve 'freedom of choice', and the corresponding training to be able to do so. To have whole societies exercising, then, is to understand the causal factors involved and the knobs needed to achieve that, and the organizational capacity to do so. That is why to say that you 'have a choice' to not exercise or exercise is a defeatist attitude and to consign whole group of people to early death. What people need is not 'choices' but solutions to achieve those choices. I myself continue to struggle. I have lost weight and then regained. There are time in which I can exercise for hours. There are times in which I achieved physical fitness that I at time I never thought I could. I will keep trying, but clearly I do not yet have mastery of my own mind.
        _heimdall 3y ago
        > If choice is so easy, anyone can pick up a textbook about mathematics, barring deficiency in cognitive capacity, become knowledgeable about mathematics. That doesn't happen not because people are stupid, but because the task is genuinely hard. You're conflating choice with a much more complex situation that raises questions of how people learn, how skills relate to nature versus nurture, and personal interest and motivations. I'm not arguing that avoiding junk food or choosing to exercise are easy, only that they are choices. Its really interesting to me that you take the view of choice as defeatist while I see the exact opposite, that the view of a lack of choice is defeatist. We both clearly have considered this in the past and feel strongly about our view, great reminder that people can seriously and genuinely consider the same situation and land on exactly opposite positions.
_heimdall 3y ago
Oh I'm specifically not saying a central authority should dictate what we can and can't have, I'd be very against that. My point is only that we as individuals could give up quite a few things that would collectively make a good dent in lowering energy use without ruining society, well-being, etc.

kiba 3y ago

It could just easily shows that people don't have choice. After all, state and local authorities decreed how much parking there should be and how zoning works. Meanwhile, the feds provided funding for an interstate system in which highways destroyed whole neighborhoods in the process. Our choices are shaped by the available options people have, sometime very little choices at all. Given that some countries are richer or poorer than other, and some countries are better at public transits than other, I find it hard to believe that the status quo can be justified by people merely making 'choices'.

RandomLensman 3y ago
Perhaps for some things, but, for example, holidays far away are a choice, buying a large house is a choice, buying lots of clothes is a choice.
- kiba 3y ago
  Perhaps for some things, but, for example, holidays far away are a choice, buying a large house is a choice, buying lots of clothes is a choice. Buying a large house is a 'choice' in the sense that much of middle housing is illegal and that political structures aren't designed to maximize the efficient use of land. There's a reason why Georgism is in vogue these days. buying lots of clothes is a choice. Ah, yes. Powered by a system that is designed to exploit brains for profit. It's like eating junk food is a choice. Or not exercising is a 'choice'. They are useless excuses that justify the status quo rather than empowering us to do something about it.
  - _heimdall 3y ago
    Wait, are you arguing that eating junk food and not exercising aren't really choices? I hope I'm just misreading sarcasm there, but they are very much choices and that itself should be empowering because people can just as easily make a different choice.
    - kiba 3y ago
      I hope I'm just misreading sarcasm there, but they are very much choices and that itself should be empowering because people can just as easily make a different choice. If choice is so easy, anyone can pick up a textbook about mathematics, barring deficiency in cognitive capacity, become knowledgeable about mathematics. That doesn't happen not because people are stupid, but because the task is genuinely hard. If choice is so easy, you would be able to able to choose to not to eat for three days and achieve that. For some people, it is extremely difficult. For others, that is easy. I have experienced both situations. Real freedom, then, is to understand that your own mind has their own cause and effect and how to manipulate that to achieve 'freedom of choice', and the corresponding training to be able to do so. To have whole societies exercising, then, is to understand the causal factors involved and the knobs needed to achieve that, and the organizational capacity to do so. That is why to say that you 'have a choice' to not exercise or exercise is a defeatist attitude and to consign whole group of people to early death. What people need is not 'choices' but solutions to achieve those choices. I myself continue to struggle. I have lost weight and then regained. There are time in which I can exercise for hours. There are times in which I achieved physical fitness that I at time I never thought I could. I will keep trying, but clearly I do not yet have mastery of my own mind.
      - _heimdall 3y ago
        > If choice is so easy, anyone can pick up a textbook about mathematics, barring deficiency in cognitive capacity, become knowledgeable about mathematics. That doesn't happen not because people are stupid, but because the task is genuinely hard. You're conflating choice with a much more complex situation that raises questions of how people learn, how skills relate to nature versus nurture, and personal interest and motivations. I'm not arguing that avoiding junk food or choosing to exercise are easy, only that they are choices. Its really interesting to me that you take the view of choice as defeatist while I see the exact opposite, that the view of a lack of choice is defeatist. We both clearly have considered this in the past and feel strongly about our view, great reminder that people can seriously and genuinely consider the same situation and land on exactly opposite positions.

_heimdall 3y ago

Oh I'm specifically not saying a central authority should dictate what we can and can't have, I'd be very against that. My point is only that we as individuals could give up quite a few things that would collectively make a good dent in lowering energy use without ruining society, well-being, etc.