3 ms·
Risking one’s own well being to help the community is basically a definition of an altruistic behaviour. Nobody and i mean NOBODY can reach and keep the positio
by vadiml 13y ago
Risking one’s own well being to help the community is basically a definition of an altruistic behaviour. Nobody and i mean NOBODY can reach and keep the position of CEO of big international corporation by exhibiting altruistic tendencies. The environment is too competitive and it promotes egoism and punishes altruism. (BTW, The same reasoning stand for political leadership too). So, I don’t think we can really expect this call to be heard…
- einhverfr 13y agoThat is a problem to be solved then.
- chii 13y agono it isn't a problem to be solved, it is a property of the world (of human psyche), like gravity is a property of matter.
- nitrogen 13y agoProperties of the world can still be problems to be solved. Gravity is a problem solved by rockets. What is the solution to the gravity of human avarice?
- chii 13y agoif you put it that way, the only solution is to brute force it (i.e., have cheap, limitless energy, which is easy for any and everyone to utilize).
- e_w 13y agoSorry, but this is a textbook example of oversimplification.
- omarchowdhury 13y agoIsn't saying this is a oversimplification, an oversimplification?
- vadiml 13y agoI'd say it is basic game theory and statistics. If we have population of individuals who exhibit three types of behaviour: A - altruistic (1% of population) E - egoistic (1% ...) N - Normal (randomly A or B 98% of population) Let's them play a game where E - type has muuuuch better chances to win.... It is obvious that the proportion of E - types in the winner population will grow during the tournament. This explain the current state of world affaires: Usually 'Supreme Leader' is the "biggest bastard of them all"...
- wiml 13y agoIt's basic extrapolating-without-data is what it is. You have a theory, well, let's call it a hypothesis ("a person who reaches CEO level is someone who will not behave altruistically"). You even have a simple model which mostly agrees with the hypothesis (not completely, I'll note) and which relies on several more untested hypotheses. Both the hypothesis and the model predict certain things about the world. You can check! Are those predictions borne out in reality? (˙˙˙ʎʃʃɐǝɹ ʇoᴎ :ɹǝʍsu∀)
- dasil003 13y agoOkay, let's not call on powerful people to do the right thing then. I mean they were the ones with the ambition to influence the world, so it's pointless to even ask them to have some morals.
- PavlovsCat 13y agoWhere do you see a connection between influencing the world for personal gains and having morals?
- dasil003 13y agoUh, in the comment I was responding to?