Motivation and procrastination is hard to help with. I explicitly made it out of scope for my async tutoring, which is self-paced.
One tip is to try self-help books, but I know you already tried that.
Something I can do is make philosophy stuff and maybe some people will like it and be inspired or motivated. If some of my philosophy stuff seems particularly fun or interesting to you, you can say that (that’s worthwhile feedback for me), and you could try focusing on those topics more.
I would too. I would first pay Elliot for philosophy work such that he can do as much philosophy as he wants to.
A possible misaligned incentive would be to give more to posters who agree more with you. If the posters felt pressured to agree for money that would compromise their integrity and make them worse off in respect to philosophy. It would have to be primarily based on how much effort you put in. Getting good at lots of uncontroversial prerequisite skills, being persistent in debate, doing rigorous analysis and being honest would all be good metrics to base your support on. At the same time I don’t think you should support your ideological enemies, so there would be a balance.
I think It would also have to be pretty much secret in order not to attract people because of the money. The interest has to come for philosophy itself.
But I wouldn’t give to the charities that Hank’s little brother participates in. I could give to him if he was grateful and was trying to get off on his own feet.
Oh ok I think i have in mind doing stuff like this. Like I think about the benefit of others and dont stop to think of myself(e.g. when others ask me to do an activity with them). It leaves me with some kind of dissatisfaction not cuz of them but because i didnt stop to think how good is doing the activity for myself.
That’s a good question. Hank had so much, and he already did give a lot. He housed his family and was I remember trying to keep the economy alive helping others securing their jobs and keep making money.
It looks like Hank did have more than he needed like he was rich and well off. On the one hand, I say he shouldnt be an a-hole(sorry for my language) and should share his wealth. On the other hand, I say why should he want to share his wealth? Like why does he want to do it?
As I understand it (I haven’t studied this history) art patronage (was there patronage for philosophers/intellectuals as well?) was more popular before modern times. I think there was a mixture of commissions and just supporting the artist and letting him create what he wanted freely. I think letting the artist create freely is good. I think I would let Elliot work freely and then offer extra for specific philosophy work.
What would I spend on if I was rich? I would pay for convenience. I would pay to save time. I would pay for private tutoring. I would buy lots of art from Bryan Larsen and I would pay Roark to architect my house. I would put more money into new productive endeavors. But maybe a greater value than all those would be high quality discussions with peers. Supporting CF learners would be an investment to have great discussions later. So it would be in quite direct self-interest. I could also potentially hire someone who got really good at TOC for example.
But let’s say I was too busy to have lots of discussions, I would still value it. Knowing there’s a sanctuary for the best of the species and that I’m supporting it would be a value to me. It would make me happy. Likewise I would give to CF if I was dying. It’s an abstract spiritual value. It doesn’t have to be of material self-interest to be in my interest because ultimately it’s the spiritual values that matters.
Yes, I would that but for coaching
Edit: mb, i didnt mean to send this draft yet
I see you’re uncertain, but if you take this side for a moment. And let’s say the help he gives is very unlikely to be in his self-interest. Instead of giving to potential world class philosophers he would give to those who are most wretched. Would you say Hank isn’t merely a jerk if he doesn’t give to them, but that he has a moral obligation/duty to do so, and is evil if he doesn’t?
I’m not sure whether being jerk is just a degree of evil or not.
Dangit I didnt mean to post the replying to ET stuff yet that was just a draft i was making
just edit the post to say oops i didn’t mean to send this draft yet (and remove all the other text)
Consider this: would you relieve a 22 year old Ayn Rand from her waitress work if you could? I would absolutely. Would it be in my self-interest? I think so.
I wouldnt say that. It sounds bad to give money to people who are most wretched.
Is “them” referring to the most wretched right? If it refers to potential world class philosophers, then idk. I would like to know why Hank wouldn’t.
Yes. But you might have the wrong idea of what wretched means. Here’s the New Ox definition I used:
(of a person) in a very unhappy or unfortunate state: I felt so wretched because I thought I might never see you again.
Btw there could be overlap, like Mallory would be arguably among the most wretched and a potential world class philosopher. But exclude the potential world class philosophers like Mallory.
You’re right I thought it meant immoral or evil.
Ahhhh ok I think I could answer your question again.
Idk now cuz I wanna know why are they so wretched? Like will the money even help? I would say Rearden is evil if I thought people’s skills and achievements were determined from birth and there’s no improving.
A post was merged into an existing topic: [Dface] Discussion of Introduction to Theory of Constraints