Advertising is bad because it’s fundamentally about influencing people to do things they wouldn’t do otherwise. That takes us all away from what’s actually important.
Advice is bad because it’s fundamentally about influencing people to do things they wouldn’t do otherwise. Giving and receiving advice takes us all away from what’s actually important.
Sorry for the snark, but I think this is too general of an argument, proves too much, and therefore fails.
Advice from a person who doesn’t care about you and makes money when you follow it is useless at best, and likely harmful. Advertising from a friend who wants what’s best for you might be beneficial, if such a thing existed.
I don’t think this is fair. Advice is usually given when requested. In fact, people often don’t like receiving unsolicited advice. I’m sure people would be fine with advertisement if it was opt-in.
Yet we also often think unsolicited advice is net good even if the person dislikes it, e.g. an intervention to get a drug addict to clean up. People might be okay with opt-in ads, but we should leave open the possibility that the world is actually better sometimes when you’re coerced, including into seeing an ad, given that it in general seems possible to coerce others for what we consider to be net good.
I didn’t mean to imply that advice is always given with consent. I just meant that it is so to a far larger degree than advertisement, and that that is an important difference.
Even when advice is unsolicited (your intervention example is a good one) it is usually done with the intention of doing something good for the recipient. I think advertisement is usually carried out with the intention to benefit the advertiser. Again, I’m not saying it’s always black and white. But I think there are pretty clear differences between these two activities on average.
I think advertisement is usually carried out with the intention to benefit the advertiser. Again, I’m not saying it’s always black and white. But I think there are pretty clear differences between these two activities on average.
Sure, a great counter example might be anti-smoking ads, or pro COVID-19 vaccine ads (assuming there’s general agreement that less smoking and more vaccines are net good).
Advice is bad because it’s fundamentally about influencing people to do things they wouldn’t do otherwise. Giving and receiving advice takes us all away from what’s actually important.
Sorry for the snark, but I think this is too general of an argument, proves too much, and therefore fails.
Advice from a person who doesn’t care about you and makes money when you follow it is useless at best, and likely harmful. Advertising from a friend who wants what’s best for you might be beneficial, if such a thing existed.
I don’t think this is fair. Advice is usually given when requested. In fact, people often don’t like receiving unsolicited advice. I’m sure people would be fine with advertisement if it was opt-in.
Yet we also often think unsolicited advice is net good even if the person dislikes it, e.g. an intervention to get a drug addict to clean up. People might be okay with opt-in ads, but we should leave open the possibility that the world is actually better sometimes when you’re coerced, including into seeing an ad, given that it in general seems possible to coerce others for what we consider to be net good.
I didn’t mean to imply that advice is always given with consent. I just meant that it is so to a far larger degree than advertisement, and that that is an important difference.
Even when advice is unsolicited (your intervention example is a good one) it is usually done with the intention of doing something good for the recipient. I think advertisement is usually carried out with the intention to benefit the advertiser. Again, I’m not saying it’s always black and white. But I think there are pretty clear differences between these two activities on average.
Sure, a great counter example might be anti-smoking ads, or pro COVID-19 vaccine ads (assuming there’s general agreement that less smoking and more vaccines are net good).