The object is to get around my reasons, not dismiss them as bad reasons.
I understand that that’s the object, but I hope you aren’t excluding the possibility that some of your reasons—or anyone’s reasons—might actually be bad reasons. That’s a concern I have with this whole post: it could be a net rationality loss if you let your attitude shift from “I will do X if objections W, Y and Z are overcome,” to “I will do X if and only if etc.”
It is certainly possible that some reasons are bad. When people have presented options as partial solutions, I am in some cases willing to meet those partial solutions halfway. But “It only costs $X and it’s a functionality that comes with $OBJECT so that can’t be too much even though I know nothing about your finances or why you want free options” is not a responsive answer to my complaint that things cost money. X ≠ 0 and I don’t have $OBJECT already.
I understand that that’s the object, but I hope you aren’t excluding the possibility that some of your reasons—or anyone’s reasons—might actually be bad reasons. That’s a concern I have with this whole post: it could be a net rationality loss if you let your attitude shift from “I will do X if objections W, Y and Z are overcome,” to “I will do X if and only if etc.”
It is certainly possible that some reasons are bad. When people have presented options as partial solutions, I am in some cases willing to meet those partial solutions halfway. But “It only costs $X and it’s a functionality that comes with $OBJECT so that can’t be too much even though I know nothing about your finances or why you want free options” is not a responsive answer to my complaint that things cost money. X ≠ 0 and I don’t have $OBJECT already.
You know that wasn’t me, right?
Didn’t say it was.