4 ms·

For something to be deserved, it must be earned. What do these people do to distinguish themselves from The Engineer’s pets? If they are wholly dependant on him

For something to be deserved, it must be earned. What do these people do to distinguish themselves from The Engineer’s pets? If they are wholly dependant on him for their subsistence, what distinguishes him from their god? To derive an alternate system you need alternate axioms. The axioms of our liberal society are moral equality and peaceful coexistence. Among such equals, no one person, group, or majority has the right to dictate to another. What axioms do you propose that would constrain The Engineer? How would you prevent enslaving him?

dangus 7mo ago
> For something to be deserved, it must be earned. Eeeeeerrrr, wrong! This is garbage hypercapitalist/libertarian ideology. Did you earn your public school education? Did you earn your use of the sidewalk or the public parks and playgrounds? Did you earn your library card? Did you earn your citizenship or right to vote? Did you earn the state benefits you get when you are born disabled? Did you earn your mother’s love? No, these are what we call public services, unalienable rights, and/or unconditional humanity. We don’t revolve the entire world and our entire selves solely around profit because it’s not practical and it’s empty at its core. Arguably we still do too much profit-based society stuff in the US where things like healthcare and higher education should be guaranteed entitlements that have no need to be earned. Many other countries see these aspects of society as non-negotiable communal benefits that all should enjoy. In this hypothetical society with The Engineer, it’s likely that The Engineer would want or need to win over the minds of their society in some way to prevent their own demise and ensure they weren’t overthrown, enslaved, or even just thought of as an evil person. Many of my examples above like public libraries came about because gilded age titans didn’t want to die with the reputation of robber barons. Instead, they did something anti-profit and created institutions like libraries and museums to boost the reputation of their name. It’s the same reason why your local university has family names on its buildings. The wealthiest people in society often want to leave a positive legacy where the alternative without philanthropy and, essentially, wealth redistribution, is that they are seen as horrible people or not remembered at all.
- thegrimmest 7mo ago
  > This is garbage hypercapitalist/libertarian ideology. Go on then, how do you decide what people deserve? How do you negotiate with others who disagree with you? > examples above like public libraries I agree! The nice part about all these mechanisms is that they’re voluntary. If you’re suggesting that The Engineer’s actions should be constrained entirely by his own conscience and social pressure, then we agree. No laws or compulsion required.
  - dangus 7mo ago
    We decide via a hopefully elected government. These examples aren’t generally voluntary once implemented. I can’t get a refund from my public library or parks department if I decide not to use it. The social pressure placed on The Engineer is the manifestation of law. That’s all law is: a set of agreed-upon social contracts, enforced by various means. Obviously, many dictators and governments get away with badly mistreating their subjects, and that’s unfortunate, shouldn’t happen, and shouldn’t be praised as a good system. I think you may be splitting hairs a little bit here and trying really hard to manufacture…something.
    - thegrimmest 7mo ago
      Slavery was (is) also an agreed upon social contract, enforced by various means. What makes it wrong? You clearly have morally prescriptive beliefs. Why are you so sure that your moral prescriptions are the right ones? And that being in the majority gives you the right to impose your beliefs on others? What if you are in the minority? Do you just accept the hypercapitalist dictates of the majority? Why not? Law is more than convention. What distinguishes legitimate from illegitimate law? The only way for people who disagree axiomatically to get along is to impose on each other minimally.
      - idiotsecant 7mo ago
        Slavery(!?) was an agreed upon social contract? Like what in the actual are you talking about
idiotsecant 7mo ago
Hey, dude. How does someone earn value once automation does all the work? Earning the right to a share of the resources when resources are derived from automated labor is such a thoroughly pathological concept that I'm not sure we're communicating on the same planet.
- thegrimmest 7mo ago
  Same way everyone has earned value from the beginning of time: negotiate with others. We are all born naked and without possessions. Everything we get, from the first day of our birth, is given to us by someone else. Our very first negotiations are simple, we are in turns endearing and annoying. As we grow older they become more complex. All I’m saying is that these interactions should be maximally voluntary and nonviolent.

dangus 7mo ago

> For something to be deserved, it must be earned. Eeeeeerrrr, wrong! This is garbage hypercapitalist/libertarian ideology. Did you earn your public school education? Did you earn your use of the sidewalk or the public parks and playgrounds? Did you earn your library card? Did you earn your citizenship or right to vote? Did you earn the state benefits you get when you are born disabled? Did you earn your mother’s love? No, these are what we call public services, unalienable rights, and/or unconditional humanity. We don’t revolve the entire world and our entire selves solely around profit because it’s not practical and it’s empty at its core. Arguably we still do too much profit-based society stuff in the US where things like healthcare and higher education should be guaranteed entitlements that have no need to be earned. Many other countries see these aspects of society as non-negotiable communal benefits that all should enjoy. In this hypothetical society with The Engineer, it’s likely that The Engineer would want or need to win over the minds of their society in some way to prevent their own demise and ensure they weren’t overthrown, enslaved, or even just thought of as an evil person. Many of my examples above like public libraries came about because gilded age titans didn’t want to die with the reputation of robber barons. Instead, they did something anti-profit and created institutions like libraries and museums to boost the reputation of their name. It’s the same reason why your local university has family names on its buildings. The wealthiest people in society often want to leave a positive legacy where the alternative without philanthropy and, essentially, wealth redistribution, is that they are seen as horrible people or not remembered at all.

thegrimmest 7mo ago
> This is garbage hypercapitalist/libertarian ideology. Go on then, how do you decide what people deserve? How do you negotiate with others who disagree with you? > examples above like public libraries I agree! The nice part about all these mechanisms is that they’re voluntary. If you’re suggesting that The Engineer’s actions should be constrained entirely by his own conscience and social pressure, then we agree. No laws or compulsion required.
- dangus 7mo ago
  We decide via a hopefully elected government. These examples aren’t generally voluntary once implemented. I can’t get a refund from my public library or parks department if I decide not to use it. The social pressure placed on The Engineer is the manifestation of law. That’s all law is: a set of agreed-upon social contracts, enforced by various means. Obviously, many dictators and governments get away with badly mistreating their subjects, and that’s unfortunate, shouldn’t happen, and shouldn’t be praised as a good system. I think you may be splitting hairs a little bit here and trying really hard to manufacture…something.
  - thegrimmest 7mo ago
    Slavery was (is) also an agreed upon social contract, enforced by various means. What makes it wrong? You clearly have morally prescriptive beliefs. Why are you so sure that your moral prescriptions are the right ones? And that being in the majority gives you the right to impose your beliefs on others? What if you are in the minority? Do you just accept the hypercapitalist dictates of the majority? Why not? Law is more than convention. What distinguishes legitimate from illegitimate law? The only way for people who disagree axiomatically to get along is to impose on each other minimally.
    - idiotsecant 7mo ago
      Slavery(!?) was an agreed upon social contract? Like what in the actual are you talking about

idiotsecant 7mo ago

Hey, dude. How does someone earn value once automation does all the work? Earning the right to a share of the resources when resources are derived from automated labor is such a thoroughly pathological concept that I'm not sure we're communicating on the same planet.

thegrimmest 7mo ago
Same way everyone has earned value from the beginning of time: negotiate with others. We are all born naked and without possessions. Everything we get, from the first day of our birth, is given to us by someone else. Our very first negotiations are simple, we are in turns endearing and annoying. As we grow older they become more complex. All I’m saying is that these interactions should be maximally voluntary and nonviolent.