kevinsimler   19

Wealth: The Toxic Byproduct | Melting Asphalt
If you feel guilty for making money, your moral compass is pointing in exactly the wrong direction — 180-degrees from what is right.

Earnings are a measure of the good done for other people, not evils done against them.

...

The point is, money spent on consumption is toxic — value-destroying. This is true even in our daily lives, without the literal magic window. Every time we spend money on a yacht or an iPhone or a nice jacket or even food, we're taking something of value from society and using it for our own purposes.

...

Earning money (via production) is good for others. Spending it (via consumption) is bad.
worth  wealth  kevin  simler  kevinsimler  toxic  byproduct  money  token  value  intrinsic  games  guilty  0 
january 2019 by bekishore
Technical Debt of the West
Here’s a recipe for discovering new ideas:

Examine the frames that give structure (but also bias) to your thinking.
Predict, on the basis of #1, where you’re likely to have blind spots.
Start groping around in those areas.
If you can do this with the very deepest frames — those that constrain not just your own thinking, but your entire civilization’s — you can potentially unearth a treasure trove of insight. You may not find anything 100% original (ideas that literally no one else has ever seen), but whatever you find is almost guaranteed to be underappreciated.

In his lecture series The Tao of Philosophy, Alan Watts sets out to do just this for Western civilization. He wants to examine the very substrate of our thinking, in order to understand and correct for our biases.

So what is the substrate of Western thought?

Well if you’re a fish, water can be hard to see. Same thing here. In order to see our own thinking, we’ll have to triangulate it from the outside.

Watts does this by using the Chinese mindset as a foil for the Western one. He argues that the main cognitive difference lies in the preferred metaphor each of these cultures use to make sense of the world.

Westerners, he says, prefer to understand things as mechanisms, while the Chinese prefer to understand things as organisms — and these are two very different kinds of processes.
kevinsimler 
january 2014 by hecavanagh