Let's hear it!

[iago]

I've been hitting the gym to burn fat lots. That's good. What's bad is that I reward myself for going with a couple beers.

/I'd have the beer anyway, so I guess at least this way I'm still being somewhat productive?

Hmm... smoke weed instead?

Beer > weed.

In terms of healthfulness and not getting fat, that's a tough call.

(unless of course you count the 'munchies')

[CrAz3D]

If I drink a 6er now...I'm pretty toasted. I just had three, and I'm buzzed. I dont know how I used to do an 18 on a week night and smoke 20 cigarettes and be fine work for the next day. Well, "fine."

[Armin]

the wish to be remarkable is a mistake of self-cherishing, and to self-cherish is to self-enslave. punchline: to be self-enslaved is not remarkable. jokes on you, human race

[Newby]

The connection between self-cherishing and self-enslaving is not so clear to me. Care to elaborate? (Also, being self-enslaved isn't the only thing remarkable about being remarkable. Generally there's something else there.)

[Rule]

In terms of healthfulness and not getting fat, that's a tough call.

(unless of course you count the 'munchies')

The answer about whether alcohol or pot is more dangerous is quite complex I think...  In part it depends on what you mean by 'dangerous'.  For example, going to get brainwashed at some cult every day for an hour might have more of a negative effect on your life than alcohol -- and indeed might cause structural/chemical changes in the brain greater than drink will do.  But you're not going to overdose on 'brainwashing', just like you're probably not going to overdose on pot.

I do not like alcohol or pot.  But I think pot is more insidiously dangerous.  People who take it have this delusion that they might even be doing something good for themselves.  And I've noticed that there's more of a slacker/ambivalent 'culture' that surrounds it.  Yes, there are successful people who smoke a lot of pot.  But they are outliers, and quite often started smoking after they were already pretty successful (e.g. they were on 'autopilot' at that point).  Most of the potheads I know go on to do very unimpressive things.

[while1]

In terms of healthfulness and not getting fat, that's a tough call.

(unless of course you count the 'munchies')

The answer about whether alcohol or pot is more dangerous is quite complex I think...  In part it depends on what you mean by 'dangerous'.  For example, going to get brainwashed at some cult every day for an hour might have more of a negative effect on your life than alcohol -- and indeed might cause structural/chemical changes in the brain greater than drink will do.  But you're not going to overdose on 'brainwashing', just like you're probably not going to overdose on pot.

I do not like alcohol or pot.  But I think pot is more insidiously dangerous.  People who take it have this delusion that they might even be doing something good for themselves.  And I've noticed that there's more of a slacker/ambivalent 'culture' that surrounds it.  Yes, there are successful people who smoke a lot of pot.  But they are outliers, and quite often started smoking after they were already pretty successful (e.g. they were on 'autopilot' at that point).  Most of the potheads I know go on to do very unimpressive things.

Makes sense to me.  I'd think that the successful, motivated, outliers you speak of (i.e. Type-A personalities) generally have different underlying issues that drive their pot use (i.e. high stress).

[Armin]

The connection between self-cherishing and self-enslaving is not so clear to me. Care to elaborate? (Also, being self-enslaved isn't the only thing remarkable about being remarkable. Generally there's something else there.)

Self-cherishing narrows your perspective from the altruistic collective reality. Self-cherishing makes it too easy to become a slave to your self's endless, transient, unfulfilling desires.

We all have an equal right to happiness, and the happiness of many is undeniably more important than the happiness of one. You become remarkable not by chasing the self's desire to be unusually great, but by sacrificing the self for the greater good (which is, more often than not, directly or indirectly beneficial to the self. AKA being wisely-selfish)

I wish could quickly articulate these abstract thoughts more clearly.

[Sidoh]

It seems like you're (somewhat opaquely) arguing for Utilitarianism.

I partly agree.

However, I don't agree that altruism is intrinsically valuable.  Dually, I don't agree that self-cherishing, as you call it, is intrinsically deplorable.

Further, I think your notion of "remarkable" is pretty muddled.  I don't think I'm particularly fond of the way you use the word, and I don't think it's impossible (or even unlikely) to be a remarkable hedonist.

Lastly -- I think hedonism is ingrained in our species, and I don't think it's an accident.  Obviously, greed is evolutionarily advantageous.

[CrAz3D]

presentation today. nervous. so I drank a little last night. hit me harder than expected. sex'd dani. dont want to give presentation today...I hate speaking in "public"

[Hitmen]

The connection between self-cherishing and self-enslaving is not so clear to me. Care to elaborate? (Also, being self-enslaved isn't the only thing remarkable about being remarkable. Generally there's something else there.)

Self-cherishing narrows your perspective from the altruistic collective reality. Self-cherishing makes it too easy to become a slave to your self's endless, transient, unfulfilling desires.

We all have an equal right to happiness, and the happiness of many is undeniably more important than the happiness of one. You become remarkable not by chasing the self's desire to be unusually great, but by sacrificing the self for the greater good (which is, more often than not, directly or indirectly beneficial to the self. AKA being wisely-selfish)

I wish could quickly articulate these abstract thoughts more clearly.

fortune cookies are tasty

[Armin]

fortune cookies are tasty

I strongly disagree. fortune cookies are awful.

[iago]

fortune cookies are tasty

I strongly disagree. fortune cookies are awful.

Okay, NOW you've crossed that line.

[Armin]

It seems like you're (somewhat opaquely) arguing for Utilitarianism.

I partly agree.

However, I don't agree that altruism is intrinsically valuable. Dually, I don't agree that self-cherishing, as you call it, is intrinsically deplorable.

I agree to some extent. I feel altruistic hedonism can be intrinsically valuable depending on the mind at work. I'm also still unsure if self-cherishing is intrinsically deplorable, though at the very least, some sort of balance between individualism and collectivism should be met.

Further, I think your notion of "remarkable" is pretty muddled.  I don't think I'm particularly fond of the way you use the word, and I don't think it's impossible (or even unlikely) to be a remarkable hedonist.

I agree, I never liked my use of the word remarkable in this context. I used it too subjectively.

Lastly -- I think hedonism is ingrained in our species, and I don't think it's an accident.  Obviously, greed is evolutionarily advantageous.

I don't mean to bag on hedonism. Greed has indeed been evolutionarily advantageous. But we are likely the first species throughout the history of evolution with the thought capacity to consciously and logically transcend narrow hedonism with the more evolutionarily advantageous system of altruistic hedonism.

[Sidoh]

I agree to some extent. I feel altruistic hedonism can be intrinsically valuable depending on the mind at work. I'm also still unsure if self-cherishing is intrinsically deplorable, though at the very least, some sort of balance between individualism and collectivism should be met.

I'm not sure there's such a thing as altruistic hedonism -- at least not with the way I'm meaning to use the word hedonism.  A hedonist does what maximizes his happiness.  A purely altruistic action doesn't take into account the happiness of the doer.

I'll agree with your last claim, although I think one should qualify "should", because it seems to imply an existing moral standard when, on some level, you're trying to define one.

I think Utilitarianism is a pretty good model for morality.  It posits:
- The only ultimate end is happiness (at the base of things, the only reason anyone wants to do something is to be more happy)
- The happiness of any one person is no more important than the happiness of any other
- Any action should be classified as "moral" if it maximizes the happiness across all people, and "immoral" otherwise

That's a rough overview, but you're probably already familiar.

I don't mean to bag on hedonism. Greed has indeed been evolutionarily advantageous. But we are likely the first species throughout the history of evolution with the thought capacity to consciously and logically transcend narrow hedonism with the more evolutionarily advantageous system of altruistic hedonism.

Yeah -- although I don't really know what you mean by altruistic hedonism.  Maybe you could clarify?

[Newby]

Self-cherishing narrows your perspective from the altruistic collective reality. Self-cherishing makes it too easy to become a slave to your self's endless, transient, unfulfilling desires.

We all have an equal right to happiness, and the happiness of many is undeniably more important than the happiness of one. You become remarkable not by chasing the self's desire to be unusually great, but by sacrificing the self for the greater good (which is, more often than not, directly or indirectly beneficial to the self. AKA being wisely-selfish)

I wish could quickly articulate these abstract thoughts more clearly.

1. If you "cherish" (so to speak) helping others for the attention/gratification/ego boost/whatever, you can be self-cherishing AND selfless. Yes? No? Is the reason for helping others important too?

2. If you want to improve articulating your thoughts, you just gotta practice. Write more posts on here. I'd love to practice writing but am way too unconfident in my writings to actually put them anywhere, so I just don't write. But damn do I get sick of programming and doing physics homework all day. I love writing. It's so much easier than anything I do, and it's actually enjoyable. Sure, I may not be the best writer out there, but I'm capable of communicating effectively so what more am I looking for? Literary brilliance? Not gonna happen.