Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

pgslaflame t1_j0wgg85 wrote

Reply to comment by bumharmony in /r/philosophy Open Discussion Thread | December 19, 2022 by BernardJOrtcutt

Humans aren’t purely rational unfortunately. Thats why rational rules and the punishment for breaking them often do not work. Selfishness can take up self destructive dimensions. If people would be rationally selfish, for the most part selfish altruism would be the logical answer.

How is your scenario different from laws we have rn? (Except the punishment)

1

bumharmony t1_j0yapzl wrote

We don’t have a system that is maximally rational (maximum efficiency and justice) so that departure from it could be evidenced as pareto suboptimal. Obviously breaking the rules of the status quo further increases your position in so many cases. It is just an arbitrary way of living at best,

1

pgslaflame t1_j0yiznw wrote

Yea that sounds a bit hedonistic and not very utopian to me idk. I think the right approach would be to “create” people that don’t want to act unethically in the first place. Rules wouldn’t even be necessary then.

1

bumharmony t1_j0yppkw wrote

Just trying to tinker with the argument from the incoherence/shelfishness of human nature. Not guaranteeing it will fit a whole. Sadly.

And of course it is hedonistic, well, atleast materialistic because that is the question about. After the system is maximally rational, so that no one's position can be improved you can do b) give away your share if your religion tells you to. It does interfere with what is rational for the individual in particular.

1