This is a sad tale. Why invent such a sad tale? Such tales pollute and can infect.
The man in the story is obvioulsy ill. He had two years to get better, but didn’t make it. The story gives no reason to make a moral judgement. It is just the spinning of rationalist wheels—signifying nothing. The storytelling on the other hand is a shameful and irresponsible act.
Are you living in “The Least Convenient of Possible Worlds”? It is surely conceivable that the man rationally considered his alternatives, and decided that the best thing he could do for the world was to kill himself and give the money from the life insurance policy to charity. Sure, it’s also possible that he was ill, and then the story changes, but that’s not what the story says. Or do you think thought experiments are inherently irresponsible?
Yes—I think just-so thought experiments about life with their built-in answers and embedded exclusions should be rejected outright. They have no friction, no gravity and say nothing of how you should spend the next hour of your life. They are like Hollywood action films—poison.
I do not think he is suffering from depression. I think he is “suffering” from some type of short-circuiting. Perhaps a genetic deficiency which leads to “meditations in morbidity” combined with reading too much of the wrong stuff and too little feedback from people in the real world (think LW readers with no job and little network). This “data-poverty” leading to delusions of grandeur.
He needs a girlfriend, a job and a real problem to work with.
The questions (1) “Is the fact that someone does X evidence of mental problems?” and (2) “Is doing X a good thing or a bad thing, on balance?” are different. As I read it, this article is addressing #2 and not #1. (I see no reason to think that there couldn’t be rather a lot of things that ought to be done but that are psychologically near-impossible for most people with healthy minds.)
This is a sad tale. Why invent such a sad tale? Such tales pollute and can infect.
The man in the story is obvioulsy ill. He had two years to get better, but didn’t make it. The story gives no reason to make a moral judgement. It is just the spinning of rationalist wheels—signifying nothing. The storytelling on the other hand is a shameful and irresponsible act.
“The man in the story is obvioulsy ill.”
Are you living in “The Least Convenient of Possible Worlds”? It is surely conceivable that the man rationally considered his alternatives, and decided that the best thing he could do for the world was to kill himself and give the money from the life insurance policy to charity. Sure, it’s also possible that he was ill, and then the story changes, but that’s not what the story says. Or do you think thought experiments are inherently irresponsible?
Yes—I think just-so thought experiments about life with their built-in answers and embedded exclusions should be rejected outright. They have no friction, no gravity and say nothing of how you should spend the next hour of your life. They are like Hollywood action films—poison.
Assume that he is, indeed, suffering from depression, and attempts to treat it have not been particularly successful. Does that make a difference?
I do not think he is suffering from depression. I think he is “suffering” from some type of short-circuiting. Perhaps a genetic deficiency which leads to “meditations in morbidity” combined with reading too much of the wrong stuff and too little feedback from people in the real world (think LW readers with no job and little network). This “data-poverty” leading to delusions of grandeur.
He needs a girlfriend, a job and a real problem to work with.
The questions (1) “Is the fact that someone does X evidence of mental problems?” and (2) “Is doing X a good thing or a bad thing, on balance?” are different. As I read it, this article is addressing #2 and not #1. (I see no reason to think that there couldn’t be rather a lot of things that ought to be done but that are psychologically near-impossible for most people with healthy minds.)
“He needs a girlfriend, a job and a real problem to work with.”
Seconded