I’m Paul Erdos. I’ve been taking amphetamine and ritalin for 20-odd years to enhance my cognitive performance. In general I want to want these drugs, because they help me do good, important and enjoyable work, which is impossible for me without them.
I can stop wanting these drugs when I want to, like when my friend bet me $500 that I couldn’t. I wanted to win that bet, so I wanted not to want the drugs, so I stopped wanting them. Was that my only motivation?
Also, I don’t want others to want to want amphetamines just because I want to want amphetamines.
A while ago I took Euler’s place as the most prolific mathematician of all time.
It’s not about whether it’s okay, it’s about whether it’s “part of who he is” or an alien intrusion.
That doesn’t solve PhilGoetz’s example though. And in the original version of Larry, his parents might very well say that his revulsion at homosexual acts is “who he is” and his sexual feelings the “alien intrusion”. Are these concepts anything but a way of making disguised moral judgements? Is “who someone really is” just “who I would prefer them to be”?
Then again, another attitude to Larry is that his sexual feelings are who he really is, but that resisting them is a cross he has to bear. (I believe this is the Roman Catholic view.) So I don’t think the concept of authenticity solves these problems.
It’s not about whether it’s okay, it’s about whether it’s “part of who he is” or an alien intrusion.
Okay.
I’m Paul Erdos. I’ve been taking amphetamine and ritalin for 20-odd years to enhance my cognitive performance. In general I want to want these drugs, because they help me do good, important and enjoyable work, which is impossible for me without them.
I can stop wanting these drugs when I want to, like when my friend bet me $500 that I couldn’t. I wanted to win that bet, so I wanted not to want the drugs, so I stopped wanting them. Was that my only motivation?
Also, I don’t want others to want to want amphetamines just because I want to want amphetamines.
A while ago I took Euler’s place as the most prolific mathematician of all time.
Paul Erdös did it regularly, yes. Successfully, it seems — but I wonder about the costs. Does anyone have consistent data on that?
Picking only Erdös’ case, would, I’m afraid, be a case of both survivorship bias and hasty generalization.
That doesn’t solve PhilGoetz’s example though. And in the original version of Larry, his parents might very well say that his revulsion at homosexual acts is “who he is” and his sexual feelings the “alien intrusion”. Are these concepts anything but a way of making disguised moral judgements? Is “who someone really is” just “who I would prefer them to be”?
Then again, another attitude to Larry is that his sexual feelings are who he really is, but that resisting them is a cross he has to bear. (I believe this is the Roman Catholic view.) So I don’t think the concept of authenticity solves these problems.