3 ms·

I’m curious, are you using meme in the original Dawkins sense because if that is the case then I would fully and passionately agree with that to the extent wher

I’m curious, are you using meme in the original Dawkins sense because if that is the case then I would fully and passionately agree with that to the extent where that is precisely what it seems like is happening I suppose I just don’t know what that meme is at this point so how would you define the previous memetic position that led to children as a regular part of life? Further, what is the new memetic position on children that is being implemented?

s1artibartfast 2y ago
Yeah, I'm using it in the Dawkins context. I think this is an interesting topic, so I've been posting all over the thread with some of my thoughts. I'll start with increasing memes that I think are contributors to childrearing. I think risk aversion is a leading one. You see this in terms of teenage sex, drug use, and other risky behavior. The next increasing meme would be viewing the world through a materialistic and increasingly utilitarian economic lens. Think this comes at the cost of more sentimental for romantic view of existence. just looking at this threads, nearly every comment is materialist in nature: opportunity costs for leaving the workforce, social economic implications, ect. Conspicuously absent is discussion of experiential and emotional implications. What about people missing out on watching their child take their first steps or the joys and pains of the creative process that is nurturing a human into a functional adult. I think this also plays into the idea that work is intrinsically something to be minimized or avoided, opposed to something powering that can be directed. I acknowledge that I'm presenting these all as unsubstantiated personal opinion, but I think they have Merit and would be worthy of further scrutiny. Im not religious myself, but cant help but acknowledge the decline of religion it as an elephant in the room. Less so due to any specific religious doctrine, but the attention brings to non-material topics.
- orwin 2y ago
  I will only react to the last paragraph, but imho, the decline of religions has no causal relationship to the decline in birth. I do think they might be correlated, but my example is that France is way less religious than Italy or Turkey, and kept their fertility rates above 2.1 longer. Also, recently France had a small increase in religiosity, while its birthrate declined.
  - s1artibartfast 2y ago
    I wonder if that holds up when you look at demographics within each country. I don't know about the ones you mentioned, but I know that I the US, our national fertility rate is heavily increased by first generation immigrants, who are also more religious.
  - toomuchtodo 2y ago
    https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2723861/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2723861/ https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/23780231211031320 https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/23780231211031... Religiosity is a contributing factor, but more influential is societal pressure (or lack thereof).
- tivert 2y ago
  [replying to both the parent and GP] >> so how would you define the previous memetic position that led to children as a regular part of life? >> Further, what is the new memetic position on children that is being implemented? I'm not who you were asking, but I think "having children" may be an activity that is transitioning from being a larger part non-memetic to a larger part memetic, due to birth control technology. So the previous "non-memetic" position was if you like to have sex, that sex will lead to kids eventually. Now with birth control, you can like to have sex and not have kids, unless personal psychology and/or memes drive you to have kids. > just looking at this threads, nearly every comment is materialist in nature: opportunity costs for leaving the workforce, social economic implications, ect. Conspicuously absent is discussion of experiential and emotional implications. Your observation might be true, but I wouldn't really use a HN thread as support. This community, and the wider software engineer/technology community of which it is part, has a very skewed perspective and misunderstands quite a lot due to its poorly acknowledged limitations and biases. What I quoted from you hits one of those directly: a preference for and comfort with the mechanical over the emotional and interpersonal.
- mistermann 2y ago
  > just looking at this threads, nearly every comment is materialist in nature This meme has taken root substantially in the minds of The Rationalists also. https://old.reddit.com/r/slatestarcodex/comments/1e2ow7e/so_what_cant_be_measured/ https://old.reddit.com/r/slatestarcodex/comments/1e2ow7e/so_... A fun meme to launch would be that the Scott Alexander's, Richard Dawkins, Jordan Peterson's etc of the world should have to take at least some responsibility for the risk their memetic viruses introduce into the system. Edit: I may be thinking of the other materialism, but they are closely related.
  - s1artibartfast 2y ago
    I'm actually a pretty big fan of Scott Alexander and the other rationalists, although I don't always agree with their conclusions. Most rationalist philosophy is underpinned by happiness utilitarianism, which I think is fundamentally flawed. First, I don't think happiness on an individual or Global level is the most important metric to optimize for. I think there are other objectives that can stand on their own merits, and even in contrast to happiness such as virtue, progress, and integrity. Secondly, I don't believe in the fungibility of happiness utils. Utilitarianism assumes and even requires that different forms of Happiness can be made equivalent without loss of information included in their qualia. That said, I still think rationalists are ahead of the pack simply because they are interested in introspection, trying to examine life with open eyes, and trying to increase their individual agency to achieve their goals.
    - mistermann 2y ago
      Not much disagreement (and a huge fan of Scott himself), I'm more so thinking they could do so much more with the raw cognitive horsepower in the community. They'd be better without their ideology and methods imho.
      - s1artibartfast 2y ago
        I think the most important community outreach that anyone can be doing these days is encouraging people to think critically and take agency over there lives. With that in mind, I think they are building an important foundation. This enables people to make up their own minds. I have to admit that dialogue with rationalist or rationalist forums help me greatly and coming up with my own ideas, despite them being contrary to theirs. Simply Having forums to talk and think deeply is a rare and valuable service

s1artibartfast 2y ago

Yeah, I'm using it in the Dawkins context. I think this is an interesting topic, so I've been posting all over the thread with some of my thoughts. I'll start with increasing memes that I think are contributors to childrearing. I think risk aversion is a leading one. You see this in terms of teenage sex, drug use, and other risky behavior. The next increasing meme would be viewing the world through a materialistic and increasingly utilitarian economic lens. Think this comes at the cost of more sentimental for romantic view of existence. just looking at this threads, nearly every comment is materialist in nature: opportunity costs for leaving the workforce, social economic implications, ect. Conspicuously absent is discussion of experiential and emotional implications. What about people missing out on watching their child take their first steps or the joys and pains of the creative process that is nurturing a human into a functional adult. I think this also plays into the idea that work is intrinsically something to be minimized or avoided, opposed to something powering that can be directed. I acknowledge that I'm presenting these all as unsubstantiated personal opinion, but I think they have Merit and would be worthy of further scrutiny. Im not religious myself, but cant help but acknowledge the decline of religion it as an elephant in the room. Less so due to any specific religious doctrine, but the attention brings to non-material topics.

orwin 2y ago
I will only react to the last paragraph, but imho, the decline of religions has no causal relationship to the decline in birth. I do think they might be correlated, but my example is that France is way less religious than Italy or Turkey, and kept their fertility rates above 2.1 longer. Also, recently France had a small increase in religiosity, while its birthrate declined.
- s1artibartfast 2y ago
  I wonder if that holds up when you look at demographics within each country. I don't know about the ones you mentioned, but I know that I the US, our national fertility rate is heavily increased by first generation immigrants, who are also more religious.
- toomuchtodo 2y ago
  https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2723861/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2723861/ https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/23780231211031320 https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/23780231211031... Religiosity is a contributing factor, but more influential is societal pressure (or lack thereof).
tivert 2y ago
[replying to both the parent and GP] >> so how would you define the previous memetic position that led to children as a regular part of life? >> Further, what is the new memetic position on children that is being implemented? I'm not who you were asking, but I think "having children" may be an activity that is transitioning from being a larger part non-memetic to a larger part memetic, due to birth control technology. So the previous "non-memetic" position was if you like to have sex, that sex will lead to kids eventually. Now with birth control, you can like to have sex and not have kids, unless personal psychology and/or memes drive you to have kids. > just looking at this threads, nearly every comment is materialist in nature: opportunity costs for leaving the workforce, social economic implications, ect. Conspicuously absent is discussion of experiential and emotional implications. Your observation might be true, but I wouldn't really use a HN thread as support. This community, and the wider software engineer/technology community of which it is part, has a very skewed perspective and misunderstands quite a lot due to its poorly acknowledged limitations and biases. What I quoted from you hits one of those directly: a preference for and comfort with the mechanical over the emotional and interpersonal.
mistermann 2y ago
> just looking at this threads, nearly every comment is materialist in nature This meme has taken root substantially in the minds of The Rationalists also. https://old.reddit.com/r/slatestarcodex/comments/1e2ow7e/so_what_cant_be_measured/ https://old.reddit.com/r/slatestarcodex/comments/1e2ow7e/so_... A fun meme to launch would be that the Scott Alexander's, Richard Dawkins, Jordan Peterson's etc of the world should have to take at least some responsibility for the risk their memetic viruses introduce into the system. Edit: I may be thinking of the other materialism, but they are closely related.
- s1artibartfast 2y ago
  I'm actually a pretty big fan of Scott Alexander and the other rationalists, although I don't always agree with their conclusions. Most rationalist philosophy is underpinned by happiness utilitarianism, which I think is fundamentally flawed. First, I don't think happiness on an individual or Global level is the most important metric to optimize for. I think there are other objectives that can stand on their own merits, and even in contrast to happiness such as virtue, progress, and integrity. Secondly, I don't believe in the fungibility of happiness utils. Utilitarianism assumes and even requires that different forms of Happiness can be made equivalent without loss of information included in their qualia. That said, I still think rationalists are ahead of the pack simply because they are interested in introspection, trying to examine life with open eyes, and trying to increase their individual agency to achieve their goals.
  - mistermann 2y ago
    Not much disagreement (and a huge fan of Scott himself), I'm more so thinking they could do so much more with the raw cognitive horsepower in the community. They'd be better without their ideology and methods imho.
    - s1artibartfast 2y ago
      I think the most important community outreach that anyone can be doing these days is encouraging people to think critically and take agency over there lives. With that in mind, I think they are building an important foundation. This enables people to make up their own minds. I have to admit that dialogue with rationalist or rationalist forums help me greatly and coming up with my own ideas, despite them being contrary to theirs. Simply Having forums to talk and think deeply is a rare and valuable service