Chemical Responses and Shame Providing Positive and Negative Feedback to Promote Altruistic Behavior

[Steve81]

1 minute ago, Genady said:

Why would I do so?

Because I asked you politely to do so. The question then becomes, why wouldn't you do so? 

[iNow]

8 minutes ago, Steve81 said:

Because I asked you politely to do so. The question then becomes, why wouldn't you do so? 

Because you’re not worth the time 

And there’s the sense of bad faith included with several of your posts. 

[Steve81]

3 minutes ago, iNow said:

Because you’re not worth the time 

Then why post on this topic at all? Why waste your valuable time responding to me? Does a philosophical discussion threaten you or Genady in some way?

Edited August 15, 2023 by Steve81

[iNow]

3 minutes ago, Steve81 said:

Does a philosophical discussion threaten you or Genady in some way?

Yes, that’s it. How did you know?

[Steve81]

4 minutes ago, iNow said:

Yes, that’s it. How did you know?

Do you have something beyond sarcasm to add to this topic? Or should I merely ignore you?

Edited August 15, 2023 by Steve81

[iNow]

2 minutes ago, Steve81 said:

Do you have something beyond sarcasm to add to this topic?

Of course 

[Genady]

7 minutes ago, Steve81 said:

Because I asked you politely to do so.

And I politely refuse.

 

25 minutes ago, Steve81 said:

The question then becomes, why wouldn't you do so?

No motivation to do so.

[Steve81]

19 minutes ago, Genady said:

No motivation to do so.

Yet here you are, expending time and effort to reply. Clearly, there is some motivation to engage with me. Does it cost so much to share your experiences with me and others who may read this thread in the future? 

 

[Genady]

1 minute ago, Steve81 said:

there is some motivation to engage with me

Politeness.

 

1 minute ago, Steve81 said:

Does it cost so much to share your experiences with me and others who may read this thread in the future?

Yes.

[Steve81]

1 minute ago, Genady said:

Yes.

I feel sorry for you, sincerely. I have shared my experiences willingly on this forum, and I feel I have gained something from doing so.

45 minutes ago, iNow said:

And there’s the sense of bad faith included with several of your posts. 

Just saw this part of your post. There is no bad faith here. This forum has challenged me to become better, and I appreciate that. 

[Genady]

1 minute ago, Steve81 said:

I feel sorry for you, sincerely. I have shared my experiences willingly on this forum, and I feel I have gained something from doing so.

We are different. If I didn't know this, I'd feel sorry for you.

[Steve81]

Just now, Genady said:

We are different. If I didn't know this, I'd feel sorry for you.

We may be different, but we are both human. Being social and sharing your experiences is a part of that.

[Genady]

Just now, Steve81 said:

We may be different, but we are both human. Being social and sharing your experiences is a part of that.

There are different ways to be social. And different circumstances for sharing experience. You're very simplistic, again.

[Steve81]

3 minutes ago, Genady said:

There are different ways to be social. And different circumstances for sharing experience. You're very simplistic, again.

Life doesn't have to be that complex. Sometimes simple things are better.

What way/circumstances would it take for you to talk to me about your experiences? 

[Genady]

1 minute ago, Steve81 said:

What way/circumstances would it take for you to talk to me about your experiences?

Various.

$1,000,000 as a non-refundable downpayment would do.

[Steve81]

3 minutes ago, Genady said:

Various.

$1,000,000 as a non-refundable downpayment would do.

I will leave you with the same words you were earlier kind enough to bestow upon me, with a small addition. Be happy, however you choose to arrive at that destination. 

[Steve81]

@Genady

Even though we may have a clash of personalities, I have added a few more “rules” to my philosophy based on the thoughts provoked by your commentary.

 

Addendums in no particular order are:

1. Sincerely apologize for errors which cause harm to others, and learn from your mistakes

2. When you need help, ask for it.

3. If you find this philosophy helpful, share it and your experiences with others as opportunities to do so present themselves. Do not force this philosophy upon others.

Progress? Any additional thoughts?

Edited August 16, 2023 by Steve81

[Genady]

15 minutes ago, Steve81 said:

Any additional thoughts?

Sure.

IMO, the "rules-based" approach is wrong. Human psychology and social behaviors constitute an infinite-dimensional continuum. One would keep adding rules, clarifications to the rules, exceptions, special cases, etc., and will never sufficiently approximate that continuum. Moreover, after a while, children and grandchildren of the "father" of the system will have to modify older rules, delete some, replace some with their opposites, etc., because the continuum evolves.

[Steve81]

1 minute ago, Genady said:

Sure.

IMO, the "rules-based" approach is wrong. Human psychology and social behaviors constitute an infinite-dimensional continuum. One would keep adding rules, clarifications to the rules, exceptions, special cases, etc., and will never sufficiently approximate that continuum. Moreover, after a while, children and grandchildren of the "father" of the system will have to modify older rules, delete some, replace some with their opposites, etc., because the continuum evolves.

Seems like the basis for a new rule, as opposed to throwing the baby out with the bath water. Your opinion on that idea?

[Genady]

9 minutes ago, Steve81 said:

Seems like the basis for a new rule, as opposed to throwing the baby out with the bath water. Your opinion on that idea?

Not a useful rule, I think.

But more fundamentally, how the ideas for the rules, aka hypotheses, are tested before becoming the rules? Who and how makes decisions about the rules?

[Steve81]

10 minutes ago, Genady said:

Not a useful rule, I think.

But more fundamentally, how the ideas for the rules, aka hypotheses, are tested before becoming the rules? Who and how makes decisions about the rules?

General consensus based on the human experience of what promotes happiness I suppose.

[Genady]

Just now, Steve81 said:

General consensus based on the human experience of what promotes happiness I suppose.

What does it mean operationally?

[Steve81]

13 minutes ago, Genady said:

What does it mean operationally?

I’ll ponder the solution to that for a bit, but initial thoughts would be:

1. Occasional surveys to monitor & evaluate happiness, for those that opt to participate in such a system 

2. Encouraging those participants to share new things that make them happy that aren’t covered in the rules, or conversely, things in the rules that make them unhappy.

3. After discussion, take a vote.

Edited August 16, 2023 by Steve81

[Genady]

6 minutes ago, Steve81 said:

I’ll ponder the solution to that for a bit, but initial thoughts would be:

1. Occasional surveys to monitor & evaluate happiness, for those that opt to participate in such a system 

2. Encouraging those participants to share new things that make them happy that aren’t covered in the rules, or conversely, things in the rules that make them unhappy.

3. After discussion, take a vote.

Surveys don't work. Results are biased, skewed, unreliable, unrepresentative, etc.

Anyway, why wouldn't you learn what people have done already in this area?

For starters, there are free online academic courses, e.g., here:

Top Happiness Courses - Learn Happiness Online (coursera.org)

Also, if you didn't see this movie and didn't read this book, I'd recommend checking it - described, e.g., here:

Simon Pegg: 'We have no context for happiness' - BBC News

Edited August 16, 2023 by Genady

[Steve81]

37 minutes ago, Genady said:

Surveys don't work. Results are biased, skewed, unreliable, unrepresentative, etc.

Anyway, why wouldn't you learn what people have done already in this area?

For starters, there are free online academic courses, e.g., here:

Top Happiness Courses - Learn Happiness Online (coursera.org)

Also, if you didn't see this movie and didn't read this book, I'd recommend checking it - described, e.g., here:

Simon Pegg: 'We have no context for happiness' - BBC News

Surveys aren’t perfect, but unfortunately people don’t come with handy performance monitoring apps like the workstations and servers I deal with do. Ideas for improving the M&E aspect? 

I think it’s reasonable to suggest that I’ve read other people’s work on the subject, else we wouldn’t have this topic at all.

Regarding context for happiness, assuming I understand your meaning, there will always be sources of pain and sadness in the world. People get sick and die. People get injured. People make mistakes and experience shame (which apologies help with, but can’t totally eliminate). Life will never be perfect IOW.

One more important addendum: the irrefutable rule.

People are free to practice the rules that make them happy, and ignore the ones that don’t, so long as ignoring a particular rule doesn’t cause harm to others.

Edited August 16, 2023 by Steve81