Antidote: is you don’t want to be wanting to be valued higher. Because everything is random and if it were not like this then things would be very boring.
Seems to me that you made a correct conclusion… and then jumped to something inconsequential.
There is a difference between “wanting what is best for the other person”, “being maximally helpful”, and “being perceived by the other person as maximally helpful”. Sometimes they are completely contradictory. The best possible thing for the other person is to never be in a situation where they would need my (or anyone else’s) help… which would make me useless for them. Preventing problems is more helpful than solving them, but will probably be less appreciated.
Optimizing for being perceived as maximally helpful would actually be quite evil, because it would involve undermining the other person’s ability to avoid or solve their own problems, secretly eliminating all alternative sources of help, and keeping the (perceived) problems as big as possible to make your own help more needed. The person would feel grateful, because you brainwashed them and ruined their life.
In real life, this problem usually appears in less dramatic forms, but quite frequently. Like, you want to help people, but you also want to be appreciated for your help, so your “elephant in the brain” avoids the optimal way to help them in favor of a way that increases your perceived helpfulness. As a parent, you can be doing things for your kids that you should actually teach them to do for themselves. As a teacher, you can be telling your students information that they could more conveniently read from the original source, if only you pointed them towards your sources. As a legislator, you can be creating laws to help the poor, involving punishments for those who also try to help themselves (“if you make $10 as a side income, you are no longer eligible for the $100 of our support”).
Seems to me that you made a correct conclusion… and then jumped to something inconsequential.
There is a difference between “wanting what is best for the other person”, “being maximally helpful”, and “being perceived by the other person as maximally helpful”. Sometimes they are completely contradictory. The best possible thing for the other person is to never be in a situation where they would need my (or anyone else’s) help… which would make me useless for them. Preventing problems is more helpful than solving them, but will probably be less appreciated.
Optimizing for being perceived as maximally helpful would actually be quite evil, because it would involve undermining the other person’s ability to avoid or solve their own problems, secretly eliminating all alternative sources of help, and keeping the (perceived) problems as big as possible to make your own help more needed. The person would feel grateful, because you brainwashed them and ruined their life.
In real life, this problem usually appears in less dramatic forms, but quite frequently. Like, you want to help people, but you also want to be appreciated for your help, so your “elephant in the brain” avoids the optimal way to help them in favor of a way that increases your perceived helpfulness. As a parent, you can be doing things for your kids that you should actually teach them to do for themselves. As a teacher, you can be telling your students information that they could more conveniently read from the original source, if only you pointed them towards your sources. As a legislator, you can be creating laws to help the poor, involving punishments for those who also try to help themselves (“if you make $10 as a side income, you are no longer eligible for the $100 of our support”).