The concept of heroic responsibility seems to be off-putting for some people, mostly because it looks like it puts the blame of every single bad thing at the feed of an individual. Generally, I’ve answered this objection by telling them that they don’t need to look that broadly and that they can apply the concept at a smaller, everyday scale. So instead of worrying about solving depression forever, you can worry about making sure a friend gets the psychological help they need and not telling yourself things like: “It’s their parent’s/partner’s/doctor’s responsibility that they get proper help.”
Is this a correct way to explain the concept or am I strongly misrepresenting it?
Maybe it’s not a problem with explaining the concept per se, it’s just that its consequences are unpleasant. Feels like you are telling people that heroic responsibility is one of the possible choices, a one that they didn’t make, but could have made, and perhaps even should have made. -- There probably are good reasons why most people don’t take heroic responsibility, but these are difficult to explain. So it’s easier to pretend that the whole concept does not make sense to you.
Also, it’s not my responsibility to understand the concept of heroic responsibility. :D
EDIT: It may be related to the status-regulation emotion that apparently some people feel very strongly, and some people don’t even know. The problem with “heroic responsibility” might simply be the emotional reaction of: “Who do you think you are that you even consider taking more responsibility than other people around you?! That is a task worth of a king; and you obviously aren’t one. And you try to explain it to me, but I am also not a king; I don’t even pretend to be, so… this whole stuff doesn’t make any sense. You must be insane.”
It seems most people don’t feel good about being considered personally responsible for all the bad things in the world. Especially people who already suffer from anxiety of some kind.
But it’s a worthwhile thing to know about, even in everyday life. I work at a homeless shelter at the moment, and I’ve occasionally gone out of my way to help people because I knew about heroic responsibility. Even if I’m not tackling homelessness as a general problem, it has still helped me become a better me.
This seems completely incompatible with the actual concept, but certainly more palatable.
The problem with the concept as a whole is that it imposes an impossible requirement → I will be maximally guilty whatever I do → why even bother doing anything. Humans (with rare exceptions) just aren’t built such that heroic responsibility works for them. If I’m only responsible for close relatives and friends plus some limited charity, I can actually fulfill my responsibilities so there’s a reason to try, and so unheroic responsibility is a better model to live by unless you want to impress LWers.
The way I would put it: Doing the right thing is hard. It doesn’t mean one should give up without trying. Also, something can be done better even if it’s not done perfectly.
In what contexts do you try to convince other people of heroic responsibility? Why do you want to frame it that way?
I think the concept comes on LW from HPMOR. Specifically from:
“You could call it heroic responsibility, maybe,” Harry Potter said. “Not like the usual sort. It means that whatever happens, no matter what, it’s always your fault. Even if you tell Professor McGonagall, she’s not responsible for what happens, you are. Following the school rules isn’t an excuse, someone else being in charge isn’t an excuse, even trying your best isn’t an excuse. There just aren’t any excuses, you’ve got to get the job done no matter what.”
Most people reject that kind of responsibility. It’s no accident that the person who wrote those lines is on a quest to safe the world.
It also in some sense quite telling that the character who speaks those lines is a child who hasn’t learned the rules about what is and what isn’t his business.
Taking responsibility for the life on another is invasive and if you look at the story than Hermoine isn’t that happy that Harry tries to be the prime hero.
Half a year ago I sat in a café and had a conversation about personal development. As “collateral damage” the words I spoke brought up a deep personal issue in a stranger next to me and the person sort of angrily started an interaction with me. I went into a direct 10 minute NLP intervention.
Hopefully it helped but I didn’t gave the person afterwards my contact details to prolong the interaction with him but just told him to seek help elsewhere.
That particular interaction burned my out and it was okay because the other person started it.
If I’m however sitting in public transportation and the person sitting next to me is crying after ending a telephone conversation I don’t take it as my responsibility to fix the issue.
There are days were I might do a bit on a nonverbal level but I wouldn’t impose myself into the situation by speaking words. I could try to play the role of a hero, but I often chose against it and that’s fine.
When it comes to psychological help for friends, then I think it’s good to offer it. It’s good to explain to someone which choices are available to them. On the other hand everybody has a right to feel bad and if a friend wants to feel bad and/or not be helped by myself, then it’s not my business to break through and make him feel well.
That also means that if people around you don’t want to take responsibility, don’t force it on them. It often much better to lead by example. Tell others stories about how you feel great because you made a difficult decision to practice heroic responsibility. Bonus points for picking stories that are not out of reach for your audience ;)
In what contexts do you try to convince other people of heroic responsibility? Why do you want to frame it that way?
I’m not exactly trying to convince them, just trying to explain the concept. It’s something that occasionally comes up when you mention Less Wrong somewhere on the internet. “Less Wrong, aren’t those the guys that think you are personally responsible for children dying in Africa?”
That also means that if people around you don’t want to take responsibility, don’t force it on them. It often much better to lead by example. Tell others stories about how you feel great because you made a difficult decision to practice heroic responsibility. Bonus points for picking stories that are not out of reach for your audience ;)
“Less Wrong, aren’t those the guys that think you are personally responsible for children dying in Africa?”
In those cases, it’s useful to explain the advantages of that mindset. Knowing you saved a child in Africa from dying through malaria feels really great. It makes you feel powerful and makes you feel agentship.
Happiness research shows that giving to other people often makes you more happy than buying possessions for yourself.
Um. The one time I donated to a charity (as a child), I immediately felt terrible guilt. My family was poor at the time, and I realized my parents might have needed those $300 of saved-up allowance. When I save money, I reduce the risk that I will be a burden to those close to me, and that’s really fucking valuable.
The concept of heroic responsibility seems to be off-putting for some people, mostly because it looks like it puts the blame of every single bad thing at the feed of an individual. Generally, I’ve answered this objection by telling them that they don’t need to look that broadly and that they can apply the concept at a smaller, everyday scale. So instead of worrying about solving depression forever, you can worry about making sure a friend gets the psychological help they need and not telling yourself things like: “It’s their parent’s/partner’s/doctor’s responsibility that they get proper help.”
Is this a correct way to explain the concept or am I strongly misrepresenting it?
Maybe it’s not a problem with explaining the concept per se, it’s just that its consequences are unpleasant. Feels like you are telling people that heroic responsibility is one of the possible choices, a one that they didn’t make, but could have made, and perhaps even should have made. -- There probably are good reasons why most people don’t take heroic responsibility, but these are difficult to explain. So it’s easier to pretend that the whole concept does not make sense to you.
Also, it’s not my responsibility to understand the concept of heroic responsibility. :D
EDIT: It may be related to the status-regulation emotion that apparently some people feel very strongly, and some people don’t even know. The problem with “heroic responsibility” might simply be the emotional reaction of: “Who do you think you are that you even consider taking more responsibility than other people around you?! That is a task worth of a king; and you obviously aren’t one. And you try to explain it to me, but I am also not a king; I don’t even pretend to be, so… this whole stuff doesn’t make any sense. You must be insane.”
It seems most people don’t feel good about being considered personally responsible for all the bad things in the world. Especially people who already suffer from anxiety of some kind.
But it’s a worthwhile thing to know about, even in everyday life. I work at a homeless shelter at the moment, and I’ve occasionally gone out of my way to help people because I knew about heroic responsibility. Even if I’m not tackling homelessness as a general problem, it has still helped me become a better me.
This seems completely incompatible with the actual concept, but certainly more palatable.
The problem with the concept as a whole is that it imposes an impossible requirement → I will be maximally guilty whatever I do → why even bother doing anything. Humans (with rare exceptions) just aren’t built such that heroic responsibility works for them. If I’m only responsible for close relatives and friends plus some limited charity, I can actually fulfill my responsibilities so there’s a reason to try, and so unheroic responsibility is a better model to live by unless you want to impress LWers.
The way I would put it: Doing the right thing is hard. It doesn’t mean one should give up without trying. Also, something can be done better even if it’s not done perfectly.
In what contexts do you try to convince other people of heroic responsibility? Why do you want to frame it that way?
I think the concept comes on LW from HPMOR. Specifically from:
Most people reject that kind of responsibility. It’s no accident that the person who wrote those lines is on a quest to safe the world.
It also in some sense quite telling that the character who speaks those lines is a child who hasn’t learned the rules about what is and what isn’t his business. Taking responsibility for the life on another is invasive and if you look at the story than Hermoine isn’t that happy that Harry tries to be the prime hero.
Half a year ago I sat in a café and had a conversation about personal development. As “collateral damage” the words I spoke brought up a deep personal issue in a stranger next to me and the person sort of angrily started an interaction with me. I went into a direct 10 minute NLP intervention.
Hopefully it helped but I didn’t gave the person afterwards my contact details to prolong the interaction with him but just told him to seek help elsewhere. That particular interaction burned my out and it was okay because the other person started it.
If I’m however sitting in public transportation and the person sitting next to me is crying after ending a telephone conversation I don’t take it as my responsibility to fix the issue.
There are days were I might do a bit on a nonverbal level but I wouldn’t impose myself into the situation by speaking words. I could try to play the role of a hero, but I often chose against it and that’s fine.
When it comes to psychological help for friends, then I think it’s good to offer it. It’s good to explain to someone which choices are available to them. On the other hand everybody has a right to feel bad and if a friend wants to feel bad and/or not be helped by myself, then it’s not my business to break through and make him feel well.
That also means that if people around you don’t want to take responsibility, don’t force it on them. It often much better to lead by example. Tell others stories about how you feel great because you made a difficult decision to practice heroic responsibility. Bonus points for picking stories that are not out of reach for your audience ;)
I’m not exactly trying to convince them, just trying to explain the concept. It’s something that occasionally comes up when you mention Less Wrong somewhere on the internet. “Less Wrong, aren’t those the guys that think you are personally responsible for children dying in Africa?”
This looks like good advice. Thank you.
In those cases, it’s useful to explain the advantages of that mindset. Knowing you saved a child in Africa from dying through malaria feels really great. It makes you feel powerful and makes you feel agentship.
Happiness research shows that giving to other people often makes you more happy than buying possessions for yourself.
To what extent has this been shown when you will never meet or hear directly from the recipients of your gift?
Um. The one time I donated to a charity (as a child), I immediately felt terrible guilt. My family was poor at the time, and I realized my parents might have needed those $300 of saved-up allowance. When I save money, I reduce the risk that I will be a burden to those close to me, and that’s really fucking valuable.