Good stuff, Grant. I will push back a little on this:
"I don’t want to go down the human nature rabbit hole, but suffice it to say if you share my priors you understand that human beings are inherently self-interested. We don’t do things that conflict with our deep perception of self-interest, whether conscious or otherwise."
The "or otherwise" thing seems slippery to me. I can accept the idea that you can evaluate my actions based on both the reasons I supply and your tests of whether they're logical and coherent with other actions. But once we get into the realm of "you unconsciously did such-and-such things to advance a subliminal self-interest," I'm out.
I do what I do. But to declare that it's all self-interest at the bottom, regardless of the person or transaction, is a metaphysical if not an outright religious statement. If that’s your god, so be it. But I think a better deal between dissidents would be one where we agree not to try to mindread each other while the Hydra is dancing.
Thanks, Mark! I'm glad you pushed back so I can elaborate. Its just evolutionary psychology, and it is totally compatible/consilient with an enlightened Christian worldview such as the one I imagine you hold. You can really go do different compatible ways with this and still align with ultimate truth. You can put higher order values outside of what you characterize as "self-interest" or you can rehabilitate "self-interest" to explicitly include these higher order values. One of my central premises is that for the morally conscious, earthly punishments that accompany hypocrisy and delusion mirror exactly the cosmic consequences of sin. Once morally conscious, aligning your behaviors with your purported values becomes inextricably linked with your self interest. By becoming morally conscious and doing everything you can to deny yourself the comfort of delusion you foreclose the ability to profit at the expense of the innocent. Fixation on such profit at any cost is a common understanding of what self-interest is, or what it means to be selfish, but it doesn't apply once one is aligned/justified in a Pauline sense. I imagine that you scoff at the notion that everything comes down to *mere* self-interest, but this deliberate alignment is the only way we can turn our base nature and limitations (inherent tendency to sin) towards good.
Regarding mind reading I strongly advocate for giving charitable interpretations of the intent of others/avoiding mind reading when you're dealing with those assumed to be allies. We must speculate as to the motives of our enemies (who make no effort to hide the fact that they are our enemies) to better understand them and how to counter them. Perhaps even how to win them over. If you try to separate self-interest from higher order values it just isn't as elegant of a heuristic in my view to support this task. It also helps facilitate trust of allies. I am quick to trust those I recognize as morally conscious because I know they would pay a cost if they were to betray me. Not completely fool proof and I subscribe to the idea that it is better to be trust who you call friend and be betrayed than not trust those you call friend at all.
This conception of self-interest is a tool meant to help dissidents align against the hydra, who in their duplicitous nature can only trust in a coercive manner e.g. blackmail. This limits the extent to which their bonds can be forged on the back of pro-social emotion. Those who have figured out how to get what they need without taking it out of anyone else's hide are easier to trust. I'm reflexively disgusted by those who claim to be altruists, as given this prior I instinctively know that they are engaged in an elaborate attempt to moralize their self-interest in a manner that is deceptive. I moralize my own self-interest because we are all essentially designed to, but I aim to do so in a forthcoming and transparent manner. This is where we will depart, because you won't want to conceive of religion as a moralization of your self-interest. That is understandable. We do have different beliefs and we can't chose what narratives resonate with us best in our quest for truth. I know that my position will come across as sterile and uninspiring, but I still do believe in good and evil and that we are engaged in an epic struggle between the two. I also believe that understanding nature to the best of my ability will give my side the best edge in this struggle, and I know that within the lessons imparted religion are truths about an infinitely complex nature without which we would not be able to discern.
The Black Swan guy? I like that concept, but I haven't actually read it. Does he talk about this in that book or some other place? If another place could you share a link?
Some other—eponymous—place under the banner Skin in the Game: Hidden Asymmetries in Daily Life 🙂 Trails your cited Taleb's ticket to fame by over a decade.
Great quote from this "Talk is cheap and people who talk and don’t do are easily detectable by the public because they are too good at talking." Thanks for the link!
Good stuff, Grant. I will push back a little on this:
"I don’t want to go down the human nature rabbit hole, but suffice it to say if you share my priors you understand that human beings are inherently self-interested. We don’t do things that conflict with our deep perception of self-interest, whether conscious or otherwise."
The "or otherwise" thing seems slippery to me. I can accept the idea that you can evaluate my actions based on both the reasons I supply and your tests of whether they're logical and coherent with other actions. But once we get into the realm of "you unconsciously did such-and-such things to advance a subliminal self-interest," I'm out.
I do what I do. But to declare that it's all self-interest at the bottom, regardless of the person or transaction, is a metaphysical if not an outright religious statement. If that’s your god, so be it. But I think a better deal between dissidents would be one where we agree not to try to mindread each other while the Hydra is dancing.
Thanks, Mark! I'm glad you pushed back so I can elaborate. Its just evolutionary psychology, and it is totally compatible/consilient with an enlightened Christian worldview such as the one I imagine you hold. You can really go do different compatible ways with this and still align with ultimate truth. You can put higher order values outside of what you characterize as "self-interest" or you can rehabilitate "self-interest" to explicitly include these higher order values. One of my central premises is that for the morally conscious, earthly punishments that accompany hypocrisy and delusion mirror exactly the cosmic consequences of sin. Once morally conscious, aligning your behaviors with your purported values becomes inextricably linked with your self interest. By becoming morally conscious and doing everything you can to deny yourself the comfort of delusion you foreclose the ability to profit at the expense of the innocent. Fixation on such profit at any cost is a common understanding of what self-interest is, or what it means to be selfish, but it doesn't apply once one is aligned/justified in a Pauline sense. I imagine that you scoff at the notion that everything comes down to *mere* self-interest, but this deliberate alignment is the only way we can turn our base nature and limitations (inherent tendency to sin) towards good.
Regarding mind reading I strongly advocate for giving charitable interpretations of the intent of others/avoiding mind reading when you're dealing with those assumed to be allies. We must speculate as to the motives of our enemies (who make no effort to hide the fact that they are our enemies) to better understand them and how to counter them. Perhaps even how to win them over. If you try to separate self-interest from higher order values it just isn't as elegant of a heuristic in my view to support this task. It also helps facilitate trust of allies. I am quick to trust those I recognize as morally conscious because I know they would pay a cost if they were to betray me. Not completely fool proof and I subscribe to the idea that it is better to be trust who you call friend and be betrayed than not trust those you call friend at all.
This conception of self-interest is a tool meant to help dissidents align against the hydra, who in their duplicitous nature can only trust in a coercive manner e.g. blackmail. This limits the extent to which their bonds can be forged on the back of pro-social emotion. Those who have figured out how to get what they need without taking it out of anyone else's hide are easier to trust. I'm reflexively disgusted by those who claim to be altruists, as given this prior I instinctively know that they are engaged in an elaborate attempt to moralize their self-interest in a manner that is deceptive. I moralize my own self-interest because we are all essentially designed to, but I aim to do so in a forthcoming and transparent manner. This is where we will depart, because you won't want to conceive of religion as a moralization of your self-interest. That is understandable. We do have different beliefs and we can't chose what narratives resonate with us best in our quest for truth. I know that my position will come across as sterile and uninspiring, but I still do believe in good and evil and that we are engaged in an epic struggle between the two. I also believe that understanding nature to the best of my ability will give my side the best edge in this struggle, and I know that within the lessons imparted religion are truths about an infinitely complex nature without which we would not be able to discern.
💬 morally conscious [...] would pay a cost if they were to betray me
Taleb's famed skin-in-the-game 😉
The Black Swan guy? I like that concept, but I haven't actually read it. Does he talk about this in that book or some other place? If another place could you share a link?
Some other—eponymous—place under the banner Skin in the Game: Hidden Asymmetries in Daily Life 🙂 Trails your cited Taleb's ticket to fame by over a decade.
medium.com/incerto/what-do-i-mean-by-skin-in-the-game-my-own-version-cc858dc73260
Great quote from this "Talk is cheap and people who talk and don’t do are easily detectable by the public because they are too good at talking." Thanks for the link!
📝 Tech plea. Could you please re-format your doozy’s headings in a proper manner, so they would allow precise targeting with links? Puhleez? 🥹
support.substack.com/hc/en-us/articles/6978646417300-How-do-I-add-anchor-links-in-my-Substack-post-
--
PS Tonic 7 fella shows the way 😊 --> markbisone.substack.com/i/132551691/what-is-gay
done!
Great essay Grant
Thanks brother!
Good essay. Thank you
You are most welcome my friend!