Might be a poor comparison, but that doesn’t mean it’s necessarily a bad way to present it to thier boss. If the analogy, however flawed, communicates the underlying idea to the listener, then it was effective.
The concept here is very related to why “ceci n’est pas un pipe” is/was compelling.
I appreciated it too! You weren’t obnoxious, very much the opposite. Curious, patient, thoughtful, well reasoned. It’s obvious to me yours IS a mind that I would want to exercise against. And any discussion rooted in pragmatic outcomes would just be agreement. I think we want the world to be the same.
Ok. I think I need to tap out. I don’t think we can have the same conversation. And that isn’t a judgement or anything about you, or your points, or anything. I think that fundamentally we’re just trying to have two similar but distinct conversations.
There are two conversations: one about exploring and establishing a model of moral evaluation of action, and one about how a hospital should be run, dignity, how to organize a society for the betterment of its members, etc etc. They’re both great conversations. I’ll happily concede that yours is more important.
I keep trying to talk about morality and ethics. To me, it’s the much more interesting conversation. It’s extremely rare to actually get the opportunity to get into moral philosophy, so even fucking roadkill is great.
It’s not that I necessarily disagree with what you’re saying. It’s just that you’re not at all talking about morals and ethics, and each attempt i make to pull you back in is met in failure. Now you’re talking about “fault” which is a completely distinct philosophical concept and “failure of the hospital system” which is not really anything.
Yeah hospitals should treat everyone. I have universal Healthcare. How to run a hospital or a health system is a tedious conversation for me. The moral and ethical discussion and examination of right and wrong of actions when a moral agent is part of a social collective with health support and limited resources is interesting.
If we just talked about your thing… we’d basically just be two people roughly agreeing with each other. Which is fine, it’s just that isn’t really a valuable conversation for either of us. We’re already like 99% aligned, there is nothing material to explore or debate. I can’t offer you anything in that conversation that you don’t already have and vice versa.
Kinda, I think we’re in the same zone, but I feel you’re kinda glancing off some important points, and also bringing in unrelated concepts.
What if the money spent on the mri could have been spent on alzheimers?
Well, if at the time it was reasonable to expect that the investment in MRIs was the most effective thing to do for society that’s fine. That’s just a choice made with reasonable expectations of a positive outcome that ultimately turned out to be suboptimal. It isn’t reasonable to expect that smoking won’t statistically be detrimental to your health. It’s a self-inflicted wound, done knowing this was a likly outcome. This is the critical difference there.
Now, as for unrelated topics, you’ve muddled two distinct ideas: “moral evaluation of actions”, and “evaluation of worthiness to recieve care”.
If you need an ER doctor to pull a dildo out of your ass, but didn’t reasonably expect to demand society to end up having to pay for it, then I see no moral issue, just like if someone forgets thier hair straightener on and thier house lights on fire and the firefighters risk thier lives to rescue you.
If you fully expected to require an ER doctor beforehand, yah, morality issue there. If you light your own house on fire on purpose because you wanted to get carried down a ladder, same deal.
Doesn’t mean you don’t deserve to be helped. Doesn’t imply that you must not, may, or are obligated to feel contempt or whatever. Evaluating the STATE of a moral agent RESPONDING to a moral transgression of another is several steps removed from the ideas of the morality of self-harm in a social collective with finite support resources.
Anyways, long story short… I don’t mean to say that the two cases are morally identical. They’re both actions that needlessly risk degrading the overall health of your society. I think if you want to frame ONE as a moral issue, they BOTH are.
So, to my original point… I don’t know if the public health angle for the moral evaluation is a great one here. I think it’s hard to build a consistent and reliable moral model around.
Yeah, that’s basically it.
Harm is harm. If my recklessness gives you covid, that’s harm. I harmed you. If my wanton habits strain the Healthcare system such that they’re expending money on my emphasima instead of more MRIs, and the lack of MRIs mean the diagnostic delays kept you from finding a brain tumor before it became inoperable, that’s harm too. I harmed you.
It’s comfortable to hide behind layers of abstraction. That’s just morality laundering.
If I give you covid, and you die, that’s bad.
If I give you covid, and you spread it to your grandma and she dies, that’s bad.
If I give you covid, and you give someone else covid, and THEY give it to THIER grandma and she dies, that’s bad.
And if I give… etc etc etc etc. How far down this chain do I gotta go before you say “ah ok, no morality issue there”?
Does it matter if you expose people but none actually get it? Does it matter if people get it, but as a result of the chain reaction nobody dies?
Probably not, right? The irresponsibility of the act has already established that it was wrong, regardless of the dilution along a chain and regardless of the actual outcome. You don’t KNOW what will happen, you just have statistical models.
You might never know WHICH bean made you fart. It doesn’t matter. The collective effect produced a result.
I have the great privilege of living in a society with socialized Healthcare, so these questions do come up from time to time.
The lifetime Healthcare costs for people who have conditions which can be mitigated by lifestyle choices is a real thing. Smoking, being an obvious example much less touchy than obesity. Even if I’m extremely comfortable with the slice of my taxes that go to Healthcare… wouldn’t it be great if we got to spend less on smoking-related issues, and could instead buy more MRI machines. Merely pay for more doctors? Nurses? Expand the treatments we can even offer?
Just because they’re abstract, doesn’t make it any less of a question of morality. I don’t see any moral difference between the contaigen and smoking from the perspective of the personal responsibility of maintaining the overall health of your society. One is just accepted by society.
The idea that you’re morally obligated to maximize your own health to minimize your burden on society usually doesn’t stand up well to follow up questions.
Realistically, the societal health costs of being obese would be statistically higher than fucking roadkill. I think most people would find themselves pausing before suggesting to an obese person that thier obesity is more morally problematic than fucking roadkill.
There is something to health of an individual in a society and morality, it’s pretty hard for me to ignore that intuition. I just don’t know a real formulation which doesn’t introduce more issues to a system of morality than it resolves? Curious if anyone had one.
Lol party all you want. I’m not OP. I don’t hold absolutist views on the morality of celebrating a death.
But the moral evaluation of an agent celebrating the death of another has absolutely nothing, at all, to do with the “Paradox of Tolerance”. At the first whisper of critical thought applied to the concept, you’ll find that people will always motte-and-bailey to “It is a descriptive paradox and prescribes nothing”. So even if it was conceptually relevant, suggesting the the paradox of tolerance actually “suggests” any action is already a misapplication.
You are free. You don’t need to appeal to anything. The guy was hurting people and now he can’t anymore. You don’t need any to reference any philosopher to give yourself permission to accept 1+1=2.
We cheer when the firefighters extinguish a blaze. We don’t mourn the loss of a jagged edge on a hand railing after a craftsman sands it smooth. I’m pretty comfortable with feeling relief when I land at a toilet when I rreeaallyy have to take a shit. The hangup that you can’t be happy that something that was hurting you is gone is the weird thing. It’s incumbent on anyone to explain why you shouldn’t celebrate, not to justify why you can.
Minors can legally own shares of a private company.
I’m not saying THIS child does… and out of EVERYONE on the list that kid is entirely morally absolved anyways by virtue of being a little kid.
But, they can own shares.
Yeah. I don’t feel mentally exhausted anymore.
Fighting with myself to do stupid pointless boring stuff that I hated was just so exhausting.
I still have to do stupid pointless boring stuff that I hate… but I don’t ALSO have to fight myself to do it. Turns out that was like 60% of the expenditure.
So now I don’t feel just drained by the end of the day. I come home with way more gas in the tank for the people I actually love.
It can be more than one thing…
Because this absolutely small dick energy.
This is the national equivalent of rolling coal, which is the pinnacle of small dick energy.
There was a radio station who’s whole thing was that they would never play nickleback. Then one day they accidentally played nickleback. The Playlists were coming from some head office 5000 miles away, and they missed pulling a nickleback track once it got to the local station.
Close enough to the UFO landing pad too
Boss: I hav a nu idea
Gilbert: No don’t u realize how stoopid that
Boss: oh well I stil say do
Garfeel: oh boy Monday… NOT
I think that’s a fantastic use with a few caveats. Feel free to take this and start a consulting company on this:
Is an LLM what I want?
is the goal to parse or generate natural language?
does your use case have tolerance for inaccuracy?
If both answers are “yes”, go. Go full steam. Otherwise? No.
Outgoing call center? Go. Reading resumes? Go. High tolerance for mistakes. Cast the widest cheapest net.
Math? Health? Explosions? No.
Are you threatening me?
I constantly (although, actually less so recently) get asked if I can do something and I say “yes” before they finish the statement with “with AI”.
The end goal is making a LinkedIn post… not about whatever they asked.
Just do what everyone else is doing and lie
At first I thought it was going to be some kind of play on whatever the hell this trope is, but his was better