3 ms·

There are many people who believe that something outside themselves is more important than their own personal happiness or even basic sustenance/stability. Whet

There are many people who believe that something outside themselves is more important than their own personal happiness or even basic sustenance/stability. Whether that’s something to be admired, damned, or merely observed — it would seem Vitali made choices for reasons worth it to him, personally.

crazydoggers 2y ago
Lots of people make bad choices for themselves and others due to psychological control, manipulation, and/or abuse, such as people who willingly join cults. I’m not saying that is what happened to Vitali, but I think it’s the open question being alluded to. It is important to be aware and concerned about cultures or industries that foster cult like personality leaders.
slibhb 2y ago
Exactly right. But people today are extremely resistant to this fact. It's very clear that many, many people would give up nearly anything -- including years of their lives -- to work with someone as talented as Kubrick. Is that crazy? I wouldn't do it, but others would.
- pjerem 2y ago
  This is not the issue. The issue is that some people (like, probably Kubrick) will abuse this. There is nothing wrong in loyalty. What is wrong is unilateral loyalty.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - voltaireodactyl 2y ago
    I hope this doesn’t come off as snide, but is there a positive trait that abusive people won’t abuse for their own benefit? In my view, if there is one I’ve yet to encounter it. Which would suggest it’s largely the responsibility of each individual to decide what is important to themselves, and how much of themselves they’re prepared to sacrifice in pursuit of said thing. For some, perhaps works of art that hold meaning for millions of people over many, many years would qualify. For others, it’s a highly paid dev job. I suspect the difference between the two (and all others) “exists” more in the eye of the beholder than folks on any side of the equation would care to accept. You see it as unilateral loyalty. Perhaps he saw it as something different, or at least lived his life with both eyes open to his own experience. The only thing we can both say for sure is that we will never know for certain.
kjs3 2y ago
He had a family. While clearly he thought it was worth it personally, he wasn't making choices just for himself.
crossroadsguy 2y ago
That is true. This is the belief on which this entire, perpetual, scam of "die working for this startup for peanuts" for the great purpose of "changing the world" has been running. Every time a founder finds such sheep, mostly fresh ones but some old ones too once in a while. Sadly all that almost looks like "grateful to be abused".

crazydoggers 2y ago

Lots of people make bad choices for themselves and others due to psychological control, manipulation, and/or abuse, such as people who willingly join cults. I’m not saying that is what happened to Vitali, but I think it’s the open question being alluded to. It is important to be aware and concerned about cultures or industries that foster cult like personality leaders.

slibhb 2y ago

Exactly right. But people today are extremely resistant to this fact. It's very clear that many, many people would give up nearly anything -- including years of their lives -- to work with someone as talented as Kubrick. Is that crazy? I wouldn't do it, but others would.

pjerem 2y ago
This is not the issue. The issue is that some people (like, probably Kubrick) will abuse this. There is nothing wrong in loyalty. What is wrong is unilateral loyalty.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- voltaireodactyl 2y ago
  I hope this doesn’t come off as snide, but is there a positive trait that abusive people won’t abuse for their own benefit? In my view, if there is one I’ve yet to encounter it. Which would suggest it’s largely the responsibility of each individual to decide what is important to themselves, and how much of themselves they’re prepared to sacrifice in pursuit of said thing. For some, perhaps works of art that hold meaning for millions of people over many, many years would qualify. For others, it’s a highly paid dev job. I suspect the difference between the two (and all others) “exists” more in the eye of the beholder than folks on any side of the equation would care to accept. You see it as unilateral loyalty. Perhaps he saw it as something different, or at least lived his life with both eyes open to his own experience. The only thing we can both say for sure is that we will never know for certain.

kjs3 2y ago

He had a family. While clearly he thought it was worth it personally, he wasn't making choices just for himself.

crossroadsguy 2y ago

That is true. This is the belief on which this entire, perpetual, scam of "die working for this startup for peanuts" for the great purpose of "changing the world" has been running. Every time a founder finds such sheep, mostly fresh ones but some old ones too once in a while. Sadly all that almost looks like "grateful to be abused".