5 ms·

"The sense of self-satisfaction from being feted by the high and mighty did begin, on occasion, to creep up on me. And what a non-radical, ugly, corruptive and

"The sense of self-satisfaction from being feted by the high and mighty did begin, on occasion, to creep up on me. And what a non-radical, ugly, corruptive and corrosive sense it was. My personal nadir came at an airport. Some moneyed outfit had invited me to give a keynote speech on the European crisis and had forked out the ludicrous sum necessary to buy me a first-class ticket. On my way back home, tired and with several flights under my belt, I was making my way past the long queue of economy passengers, to get to my gate. Suddenly I noticed, with horror, how easy it was for my mind to be infected with the sense that I was entitled to bypass the hoi polloi. I realised how readily I could forget that which my leftwing mind had always known: that nothing succeeds in reproducing itself better than a false sense of entitlement." Unfortunate that the most important thought was buried at the bottom.

adaml_623 12y ago
I approve of people who can list their failings out loud and aren't ashamed of them. With this comment he's asking everyone to remind him that he needs to keep his feet on the ground and his focus on real people. And he's simultaneously telling us that our world is being shaped by 'entitled' people deciding what is best for the rest of us.
tormeh 12y ago
"Academic research has found that people’s susceptibility to flattery is without limit and beyond satire. In a study published in 1997, B.J. Fogg and Clifford Nass of Stanford University invited people to play a guessing game with a computer, which gave them various types of feedback as they played. Participants who received praise rated both the computer and themselves more highly than those who did not—even those who had been warned beforehand that the machine would compliment them regardless of how well they were doing. Yes, even blatantly insincere, computer-generated flattery works." From: http://www.economist.com/news/business/21639500-being-good-networker-pays-offbut-it-requires-skill-well-shamelessness-network-effect http://www.economist.com/news/business/21639500-being-good-n... And thus the winners of the system justify our inequality.
- atopal 12y ago
  Since that study is never properly referenced, here you go: B.J. Fogg & C. Nass (1997) Silicon Sycophants: The Effects of Computers that Flatter. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 46(5), pp 551–561. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1071581996901044 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1071581996... And yes, that 10 page paper costs $36. Thank you, Elsevier.
  - wslh 12y ago
    Happily you can use Google Search instead of Google Scholar to find it for free: http://www.psychology.nottingham.ac.uk/staff/sea/c8cxce/readings/fogg&nass_1997.pdf http://www.psychology.nottingham.ac.uk/staff/sea/c8cxce/read...
- jerf 12y ago
  Incidentally, this goes a long way towards explaining Marx's popularity. His philosophy flatters certain people, especially intellectuals, and tells them what they want to hear. For this, much can apparently be forgiven, even such minor details as "total nonfuctionality of the rest of his theories" and "hundreds of millions of corpses". Such minor trifling details are not important next to the fact that he says what many of us deeply, profoundly want to hear. And so the eternal and ever-desperate efforts by intellectuals to figure out how to separate the things they want to hear from the bits of the theory that are wrong. But, alas, I'm pretty sure they're inseparable.
  - pikzen 12y ago
    >"hundreds of millions of corpses" Except that those millions of corpses were not caused by Marx or his theories but by a flawed implementation of it by some power hungry dictators. In terms of tech, don't blame the spec if you didn't implement it correctly.
    - ende 12y ago
      And when the same blue print produces the same horrorific implementation every time? At some point it has to be recognized when the flaw is with the architect.
kybernetyk 12y ago
>how easy it was for my mind to be infected with the sense that I was entitled to bypass the hoi polloi Well a first class ticket costs far more than the economy class and offers more perks. So actually he was entitled to walk past them because he purchased that privilege. And he was able do so even though he wasn't born into aristocracy/nobility.
- tormeh 12y ago
  He knows it was paid for. He either questions whether the money was rightly apportioned to him and his flight or he questions whether money should be able to buy that privilege. See also Sveme's comment.
- sveme 12y ago
  His point was rather how easy it is for yourself to betray your convictions of people's equality, simply by someone gifting you a first-class plane ticket.
spikels 12y ago
I find this hilarious! Despite his epiphany in the airport line he seems to have no problem deciding the economic fate of not only his entire nation but much of Europe. Now that's a false sense on entitlement!
- pavlov 12y ago
  He's a cabinet member of a democratically elected government. It's not a false sense of entitlement when the people of Greece have actually entitled him to carry out the program that Syriza promised.
  - mc32 12y ago
    I guess it depends on whether you're Deleuzian or not.
  - spikels 12y ago
    Legally yes - just like his first class ticket legally entitled him to better service. But is it right for him to have such a huge influence over the so many people both in Greece and outside. Seems like a single point of failure to me. I'm just concerned that his unorthodox but popular views offer no new insight in how to solve the problem. If so Greece may doom its people to long term relative poverty and drag other countries along with it. Time will tell. I wish Yanis, Syriza and Greece the best of luck. Things could still turn out OK as economic predictions are very uncertain. However the risks are clearly huge.
    - vitobcn 12y ago
      How is that different from other single points of failure, such as Obama, Putin, Angela Merkel, etc., influencing people both within and outside their respective countries?
      - spikels 12y ago
        There is no difference. Because of their extraordinary concentration of power all of these leaders are a source of risk. If they screw up many will suffer both inside and outside their countries. Greece is at a critical point. I hope Yanis is thoughtful about risks of his government's aggressive tactics and unorthodox economic views. Some interesting questions are: - Do the benefits outweigh risks? - Are there better alternatives? - Is there a human nature bias to want strong leaders despite risks?
mc32 12y ago
I'm not sure we can do much about this. Other than through indoctrination. It's human nature. Your local public system asking for donations in return for tickets to some high minded event tug at this vanity. Never the less, there are good cases for prioritization. Say at a hospital the most critics but with the best chance for survival are prioritized. And ideology will not get rid of this. If it's not directed by money it gets directed by class or position or favoritism. So in this case I dont think the solution is to eradicate the behavior, but rather make it more accessible and less tied to a particular privilege.

adaml_623 12y ago

I approve of people who can list their failings out loud and aren't ashamed of them. With this comment he's asking everyone to remind him that he needs to keep his feet on the ground and his focus on real people. And he's simultaneously telling us that our world is being shaped by 'entitled' people deciding what is best for the rest of us.

tormeh 12y ago

"Academic research has found that people’s susceptibility to flattery is without limit and beyond satire. In a study published in 1997, B.J. Fogg and Clifford Nass of Stanford University invited people to play a guessing game with a computer, which gave them various types of feedback as they played. Participants who received praise rated both the computer and themselves more highly than those who did not—even those who had been warned beforehand that the machine would compliment them regardless of how well they were doing. Yes, even blatantly insincere, computer-generated flattery works." From: http://www.economist.com/news/business/21639500-being-good-networker-pays-offbut-it-requires-skill-well-shamelessness-network-effect http://www.economist.com/news/business/21639500-being-good-n... And thus the winners of the system justify our inequality.

atopal 12y ago
Since that study is never properly referenced, here you go: B.J. Fogg & C. Nass (1997) Silicon Sycophants: The Effects of Computers that Flatter. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 46(5), pp 551–561. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1071581996901044 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1071581996... And yes, that 10 page paper costs $36. Thank you, Elsevier.
- wslh 12y ago
  Happily you can use Google Search instead of Google Scholar to find it for free: http://www.psychology.nottingham.ac.uk/staff/sea/c8cxce/readings/fogg&nass_1997.pdf http://www.psychology.nottingham.ac.uk/staff/sea/c8cxce/read...
jerf 12y ago
Incidentally, this goes a long way towards explaining Marx's popularity. His philosophy flatters certain people, especially intellectuals, and tells them what they want to hear. For this, much can apparently be forgiven, even such minor details as "total nonfuctionality of the rest of his theories" and "hundreds of millions of corpses". Such minor trifling details are not important next to the fact that he says what many of us deeply, profoundly want to hear. And so the eternal and ever-desperate efforts by intellectuals to figure out how to separate the things they want to hear from the bits of the theory that are wrong. But, alas, I'm pretty sure they're inseparable.
- pikzen 12y ago
  >"hundreds of millions of corpses" Except that those millions of corpses were not caused by Marx or his theories but by a flawed implementation of it by some power hungry dictators. In terms of tech, don't blame the spec if you didn't implement it correctly.
  - ende 12y ago
    And when the same blue print produces the same horrorific implementation every time? At some point it has to be recognized when the flaw is with the architect.

kybernetyk 12y ago

>how easy it was for my mind to be infected with the sense that I was entitled to bypass the hoi polloi Well a first class ticket costs far more than the economy class and offers more perks. So actually he was entitled to walk past them because he purchased that privilege. And he was able do so even though he wasn't born into aristocracy/nobility.

tormeh 12y ago
He knows it was paid for. He either questions whether the money was rightly apportioned to him and his flight or he questions whether money should be able to buy that privilege. See also Sveme's comment.
sveme 12y ago
His point was rather how easy it is for yourself to betray your convictions of people's equality, simply by someone gifting you a first-class plane ticket.

spikels 12y ago

I find this hilarious! Despite his epiphany in the airport line he seems to have no problem deciding the economic fate of not only his entire nation but much of Europe. Now that's a false sense on entitlement!

pavlov 12y ago
He's a cabinet member of a democratically elected government. It's not a false sense of entitlement when the people of Greece have actually entitled him to carry out the program that Syriza promised.
- mc32 12y ago
  I guess it depends on whether you're Deleuzian or not.
- spikels 12y ago
  Legally yes - just like his first class ticket legally entitled him to better service. But is it right for him to have such a huge influence over the so many people both in Greece and outside. Seems like a single point of failure to me. I'm just concerned that his unorthodox but popular views offer no new insight in how to solve the problem. If so Greece may doom its people to long term relative poverty and drag other countries along with it. Time will tell. I wish Yanis, Syriza and Greece the best of luck. Things could still turn out OK as economic predictions are very uncertain. However the risks are clearly huge.
  - vitobcn 12y ago
    How is that different from other single points of failure, such as Obama, Putin, Angela Merkel, etc., influencing people both within and outside their respective countries?
    - spikels 12y ago
      There is no difference. Because of their extraordinary concentration of power all of these leaders are a source of risk. If they screw up many will suffer both inside and outside their countries. Greece is at a critical point. I hope Yanis is thoughtful about risks of his government's aggressive tactics and unorthodox economic views. Some interesting questions are: - Do the benefits outweigh risks? - Are there better alternatives? - Is there a human nature bias to want strong leaders despite risks?

mc32 12y ago

I'm not sure we can do much about this. Other than through indoctrination. It's human nature. Your local public system asking for donations in return for tickets to some high minded event tug at this vanity. Never the less, there are good cases for prioritization. Say at a hospital the most critics but with the best chance for survival are prioritized. And ideology will not get rid of this. If it's not directed by money it gets directed by class or position or favoritism. So in this case I dont think the solution is to eradicate the behavior, but rather make it more accessible and less tied to a particular privilege.