I relate to this post a lot. I too often feel frustrated with people for what I see as a lack of… what’s the right word to capture this? I’ll say strategicness in a Humans are not automatically strategic sense.
I think, on first approximation at least, that there is a amount of strategicness that is reasonable to expect from others, and if they fall (well) beneath it, it is reasonable to feel disgust and/or disappointment. But when I look more closely, I’m not so sure.
One issue is that I myself often fall (well) below this level of reasonable strategicness. Maybe this just means that I suck. That the bar is set at an appropriate height and I am just doing a bad job of meeting it.
Or maybe it means that the bar is actually being set too high. I’m not sure. But I at least think it’s plausible that we (well, at least people who can relate to this post) are biased towards placing the bar higher than it should be placed, and that this bias stems from a failure to understand a bunch of subtle things that make adulting difficult. In fact, I suspect that these subtle blockers are a big part of what prevent rationalists from winning as much as one might expect, and are a strong candidate for what The Art should have it’s sights on.
I also think back to chapter 87 of HPMoR. Harry and Hermione’s discussion of, I’m not sure how to put this either. How high to set the bar for morality for Draco Malfoy?
“No,” Hermione said. “Because it doesn’t matter when, Harry. Anyone who said things—like Malfoy said—they can’t be a good person. It doesn’t matter what you tempted him to, he’s still a rotten person, because no matter what a good person would never—”
“You’re wrong.” Harry said, looking her straight in the eyes. “I can guess what Draco threatened to do to you, because the second time I met him, he talked about doing it to a ten-year-old girl. But don’t you see, on the day Draco Malfoy arrived in Hogwarts, he’d spent his whole previous life being raised by Death Eaters. It would’ve required a supernatural intervention for him to have your morality given his environment—”
Hermione was shaking her head violently. “No, Harry. Nobody has to tell you that hurting people is wrong, it’s not something you don’t do because the teacher says it’s not allowed, it’s something you don’t do because—because you can see when people are hurting, don’t you know that, Harry?” Her voice was shaking now. “That’s not—that’s not a rule people follow like the rules for algebra! If you can’t see it, if you can’t feel it here,” her hand slapped down over the center of her chest, not quite where her heart was located, but that didn’t matter because it was all really in the brain anyway, “then you just don’t have it!”
The thought came to her, then, that Harry might not have it.
“There’s history books you haven’t read,” Harry said quietly. “There’s books you haven’t read yet, Hermione, and they might give you a sense of perspective. A few centuries earlier—I think it was definitely still around in the seventeenth century—it was a popular village entertainment to take a wicker basket, or a bundle, with a dozen live cats in it, and—”
Harry makes the point that we’re a product of our environments, and that given the environment Draco has been exposed to, it’s not really reasonable to expect much more of him. Maybe something similar is true for your classmates. Maybe even for the girl with the nail in her head.
I’m being rather vibes-y here. Really I think the path forward is to dissolve the question. What exactly are we asking when we ask where it is reasonable to set the bar? Whether it is a net good for society overall to “hold people accountable” for falling beneath it? Whether it is helpful in a more local relationship or group to have such accountability? Whether it does you good as an individual to set your expectations at a certain level? I’m not exactly sure what the right questions to ask are, nor their answers.
I’ve considered that myself before, part of the response I eventually got to was that my standards don’t have to lower. I can just have high standards. Just as my morality can be demanding regardless that I fail to reach its demands.
That is, my answer to the Draco-style thing is that it is good to encourage him to get better. To notice that he was worse, that he’s gotten better and that is an improvement. Just as someone who was a hitman-for-hire giving up on that because of a moral revelation and being merely a sneak-thief is still a win.
They are still a person who fails, who does not reach my bar; I hold disgust for their actions even within their newly-better state, but that I can still encourage them to become better. I still hold my bar higher than they are at.
The main problematic part of this stance is that of linking your emotions and actions to it, of feeling disquiet that you and everyone around you fails to reach the brilliant gleaming stars they could be, and then still being happy. Trying to improve, not out of guilt, but out of a sheer desire to do better, to see the world grow.
I really liked Replacing Guilt by So8res, not just in the avoiding relying on guilt part, but of instilling a view of reaching for more.
Hermione’s issue is one of blame and not quite understanding change, of still blaming Draco for his actions before he improved himself, of thinking that because Draco had failed so harshly he couldn’t be recovered. Whereas Harry views Draco as someone he can convince and tempt to become a better person, because Draco can choose to be better, that his failures are not intrinsic to him as a person. The issue is not precisely her blame, I can still be angry at someone for their actions before they changed though it loses impact, but rather the lack of a drive to push Draco to a higher point.
So the issue is not a bar, but rather the willingness/belief of dragging them up to the bar.
I relate to this post a lot. I too often feel frustrated with people for what I see as a lack of… what’s the right word to capture this? I’ll say strategicness in a Humans are not automatically strategic sense.
I think, on first approximation at least, that there is a amount of strategicness that is reasonable to expect from others, and if they fall (well) beneath it, it is reasonable to feel disgust and/or disappointment. But when I look more closely, I’m not so sure.
One issue is that I myself often fall (well) below this level of reasonable strategicness. Maybe this just means that I suck. That the bar is set at an appropriate height and I am just doing a bad job of meeting it.
Or maybe it means that the bar is actually being set too high. I’m not sure. But I at least think it’s plausible that we (well, at least people who can relate to this post) are biased towards placing the bar higher than it should be placed, and that this bias stems from a failure to understand a bunch of subtle things that make adulting difficult. In fact, I suspect that these subtle blockers are a big part of what prevent rationalists from winning as much as one might expect, and are a strong candidate for what The Art should have it’s sights on.
I also think back to chapter 87 of HPMoR. Harry and Hermione’s discussion of, I’m not sure how to put this either. How high to set the bar for morality for Draco Malfoy?
Harry makes the point that we’re a product of our environments, and that given the environment Draco has been exposed to, it’s not really reasonable to expect much more of him. Maybe something similar is true for your classmates. Maybe even for the girl with the nail in her head.
I’m being rather vibes-y here. Really I think the path forward is to dissolve the question. What exactly are we asking when we ask where it is reasonable to set the bar? Whether it is a net good for society overall to “hold people accountable” for falling beneath it? Whether it is helpful in a more local relationship or group to have such accountability? Whether it does you good as an individual to set your expectations at a certain level? I’m not exactly sure what the right questions to ask are, nor their answers.
I’ve considered that myself before, part of the response I eventually got to was that my standards don’t have to lower. I can just have high standards. Just as my morality can be demanding regardless that I fail to reach its demands.
That is, my answer to the Draco-style thing is that it is good to encourage him to get better. To notice that he was worse, that he’s gotten better and that is an improvement. Just as someone who was a hitman-for-hire giving up on that because of a moral revelation and being merely a sneak-thief is still a win.
They are still a person who fails, who does not reach my bar; I hold disgust for their actions even within their newly-better state, but that I can still encourage them to become better. I still hold my bar higher than they are at.
The main problematic part of this stance is that of linking your emotions and actions to it, of feeling disquiet that you and everyone around you fails to reach the brilliant gleaming stars they could be, and then still being happy. Trying to improve, not out of guilt, but out of a sheer desire to do better, to see the world grow.
I really liked Replacing Guilt by So8res, not just in the avoiding relying on guilt part, but of instilling a view of reaching for more.
Hermione’s issue is one of blame and not quite understanding change, of still blaming Draco for his actions before he improved himself, of thinking that because Draco had failed so harshly he couldn’t be recovered. Whereas Harry views Draco as someone he can convince and tempt to become a better person, because Draco can choose to be better, that his failures are not intrinsic to him as a person. The issue is not precisely her blame, I can still be angry at someone for their actions before they changed though it loses impact, but rather the lack of a drive to push Draco to a higher point. So the issue is not a bar, but rather the willingness/belief of dragging them up to the bar.