Am I allowed to play my own devil’s advocate? Autodevil’s advocate, if you will (writing down my ideas often helps me criticize them).
Aurini¹’s premise: Short term examples of Akrasia are due primarily to variability of self. Self¹ and Self² are both pursuing their own interests in a rational manner, it’s just that their interests are dissonant.
I still think this is largely the case; most instances of regret are either “Knowing what I know now, I wish I hadn’t put all my money in Enron,” ie “I based my choices on incorrect data,”; or the other possibility, “I wish I hadn’t done that last night, but if you press me, I’ll admit that I plan to do it again tonight,” the second may be foolish, it may be hypocritical, but it’s not Akrasia per se, because the regret is temporary, not existential.
There is a third type, however, which is distinctly counter-rational. Well need an example: getting drunk the night before, and failing to show up to traffic court (thus defaulting on an $X00.00 fine which you could have avoided). All Self(x) where (xn) agree that this was a poor choice. While there are substantial differences of Self over time, and this does not denote irrationality, the stark aberration which is Self(n) does.
So how do we start to explain this? On personal reflection, any time I’ve pulled a Self(n), it starts out subtly. “I’m stressed out about court tomorrow,” becomes “I’m going to have a drink to calm down,” becomes “Well that one tasted like three more,” becomes, “The hell with the world an their stupid laws! I’m going to drink the whole bottle!”
What we’ve got here is a positive feedback cycle. On the one hand, we can use the ex-alcoholics strategy of moving to a booze-free town, and try to avoid the downward spiral, but I worry that there’s always a new spiral waiting up ahead, one you can’t predict and avoid. Better, perhaps, would be by identifying and labelling the Akrasia Spiral, being aware of it, and learning to cut it off before it begins.
Am I allowed to play my own devil’s advocate? Autodevil’s advocate, if you will (writing down my ideas often helps me criticize them).
Aurini¹’s premise: Short term examples of Akrasia are due primarily to variability of self. Self¹ and Self² are both pursuing their own interests in a rational manner, it’s just that their interests are dissonant.
I still think this is largely the case; most instances of regret are either “Knowing what I know now, I wish I hadn’t put all my money in Enron,” ie “I based my choices on incorrect data,”; or the other possibility, “I wish I hadn’t done that last night, but if you press me, I’ll admit that I plan to do it again tonight,” the second may be foolish, it may be hypocritical, but it’s not Akrasia per se, because the regret is temporary, not existential.
There is a third type, however, which is distinctly counter-rational. Well need an example: getting drunk the night before, and failing to show up to traffic court (thus defaulting on an $X00.00 fine which you could have avoided). All Self(x) where (xn) agree that this was a poor choice. While there are substantial differences of Self over time, and this does not denote irrationality, the stark aberration which is Self(n) does.
So how do we start to explain this? On personal reflection, any time I’ve pulled a Self(n), it starts out subtly. “I’m stressed out about court tomorrow,” becomes “I’m going to have a drink to calm down,” becomes “Well that one tasted like three more,” becomes, “The hell with the world an their stupid laws! I’m going to drink the whole bottle!”
What we’ve got here is a positive feedback cycle. On the one hand, we can use the ex-alcoholics strategy of moving to a booze-free town, and try to avoid the downward spiral, but I worry that there’s always a new spiral waiting up ahead, one you can’t predict and avoid. Better, perhaps, would be by identifying and labelling the Akrasia Spiral, being aware of it, and learning to cut it off before it begins.
Easier said than done, mind you.