Yeah, but it’s not necessarily the ideal way to act. Perhaps you should act generally better than that, or perhaps you should try to amplify it more. Do what you can to find out the optimal way to act. At least pay attention if you find new information. Don’t just make a guess and assume you’re correct.
You don’t think you should discourage others from hurting you? I think that seems sort of obvious. Now, if you could somehow give a person a strong incentive to help you/ not hurt, while simultaneously granting them a shitload of happiness, that seems ideal. This doesn’t really exclude that, it’s just on the positive side of doing/ being done unto.
As much as possible for the least amount of harm possible and the least amount of wasted time and resources, obviously. Which varies on a case by case basis.
I mean if it was practical, you’d give your friends 2 billion units of happiness, and then after turning the cheek to your enemies, grant them 1.9 billion units of happiness, but living on planet earth, giving you 80% of the crap you gave me seems about right.
...living on planet earth, giving you 80% of the crap you gave me seems about right.
Consider the consequences if everyone follows your rule. Assume someone gives you one unit of crap, possibly accidentally. You respond with 0.8 units. (It’s hard to measure this precisely, but for the sake of argument let’s assume that both of you manage to get it exactly right). He, in turn, responds with a further 0.64 units of crap. You respond to this with 0.512 units.
This is, of course, an infinite geometric series. The end result (over an infinite time period) is that you recieve 2 and 7⁄9 units of crap, while the other person recieves 2 and 2⁄9 units of crap. He recieves exactly 80% of the amount that you recieved, but you recieved over twice as much as you started out recieving.
If you return x% of the crap you get (for 0<x<100), and everyone else follows the same rule, then the total crap you recieve for every starting unit of crap is:
That assumes that he is following a different rule from the rule that you are following. Does knowing that he will give you the 0.64 units prevent you from giving him the 0.8 units?
Yeah, but it’s not necessarily the ideal way to act. Perhaps you should act generally better than that, or perhaps you should try to amplify it more. Do what you can to find out the optimal way to act. At least pay attention if you find new information. Don’t just make a guess and assume you’re correct.
You don’t think you should discourage others from hurting you? I think that seems sort of obvious. Now, if you could somehow give a person a strong incentive to help you/ not hurt, while simultaneously granting them a shitload of happiness, that seems ideal. This doesn’t really exclude that, it’s just on the positive side of doing/ being done unto.
You should probably discourage others from hurting you. It’s just not clear how much.
As much as possible for the least amount of harm possible and the least amount of wasted time and resources, obviously. Which varies on a case by case basis.
I mean if it was practical, you’d give your friends 2 billion units of happiness, and then after turning the cheek to your enemies, grant them 1.9 billion units of happiness, but living on planet earth, giving you 80% of the crap you gave me seems about right.
Consider the consequences if everyone follows your rule. Assume someone gives you one unit of crap, possibly accidentally. You respond with 0.8 units. (It’s hard to measure this precisely, but for the sake of argument let’s assume that both of you manage to get it exactly right). He, in turn, responds with a further 0.64 units of crap. You respond to this with 0.512 units.
This is, of course, an infinite geometric series. The end result (over an infinite time period) is that you recieve 2 and 7⁄9 units of crap, while the other person recieves 2 and 2⁄9 units of crap. He recieves exactly 80% of the amount that you recieved, but you recieved over twice as much as you started out recieving.
If you return x% of the crap you get (for 0<x<100), and everyone else follows the same rule, then the total crap you recieve for every starting unit of crap is:
This is clearly minimized at x=0.
Alternatively: he could notice that he gave you 1 unit of crap and assume the 0.8 units of crap you gave him is an equal penalty.
If someone yells at you, you’re likely to respond—but if someone yells at you because you just pushed them, you’re less likely to respond.
Or he could know I was going to give him the .512 units, from prior experience, and not give .64, which is the whole point.
That assumes that he is following a different rule from the rule that you are following. Does knowing that he will give you the 0.64 units prevent you from giving him the 0.8 units?
Yes. Depending on the circumstance, I might give him much less or much more and/ or choose a different course of action entirely.