The difference is that you're part of something that can affect millions of people. You're not being "rational", you're being apathetic and indifferent. It's not a good quality to have, so it's not something you should be proud of or a lifestyle you should advocate. I think it's an important responsibility that people should have to educate themselves about the world and try to change things for the better. You don't have to become an activist, you just have to do your part.Railey2 wrote:
More like.. There is a 1 in 1.000.000 chance that it will change the outcome of the situation, most of the time it won't do jack shit and the result will be the same with or without me participating.
Only because I am a part of the collective doesn't mean that I can affect it as a whole. I can make my own choices, sure. But my impact will be negligible. Change happens with or without me. People will vote with or without me. There will always be the 30-50% baseline of people that don't vote no matter what, regardless of how much of an activist I am.
You call it egocentric, I call it rational. I'll have an impact somewhere else, where it actually matters. You can go and toss your 1/1.000.000 progress into the sea and watch if it makes a difference. Go vote if you want, maybe I'll go too when I feel like it. Not that it matters.
If you calculated for yourself that 1/1.000.000 is a big enough impact for you to matter, you should be picking up pebbles from the street right now because someone might trip over them and break their neck. Go look for those pebbles. It's important.
forum
ITT 2: We post shit that is neither funny nor interesting
posted
Total Posts
56,221
slut in*Hika wrote:
I have three jobs and go to school and I'm still a fuckin shut in
Just had to. :^)
ah... I see your true colours.
You misunderstand. Of course all votes as a whole matter. But fact is: Your vote doesn't change anything and you still can't affect how many people abstain, or who these people would vote for if they didn't abstain. Following the general maxim of "only meddle where you can change the outcome", this should lead to the rational conclusion that voting does, on an individual level, not matter.Foxtrot wrote:
Go vote if you want, maybe I'll go too when I feel like it. Not that it matters.And this is why some Blue states turned Red during the 2016 election. Most Dems just thought it was gonna be a free win anyway, so they didn't bother to go out and vote. And haven't you seen your neighboring countries, how they've been doing in their elections? The votes REALLY mattered there, because for a moment the chances of Le Pen or Wilders becoming a real thing were slowly becoming true. That's what drove people to go out and vote. If they thought their vote didn't matter, then they wouldn't have achieved what they'd wanted. Just throwing my two cents there. If you tell Rasp not to be a cynical bastard then you better lead by example, or not say anything at all.
This is not an example of cynicism, it's just viewing reality as it is. The outcome will be the same, doesn't matter if you're voting or not. You can't show me an example where a single vote among millions flipped a result because it's just so unlikely to happen that it never happens at all.
If you want to affect politics, you have to play bigger. Giving one vote doesn't do shit.
Yet you're my most loyal and devout slave.Hika wrote:
ah... I see your true colours.
Foxtrot wrote:
yeah, yeah, yeah, keep overreacting over a joke
If everyone thought like you, then no one would vote or do anything. We wouldn't have the abolition of slavery or equality before the law because everyone would think "well one person isn't going to have an impact so I won't even try". No one votes because they think that their vote will change the outcome of an election, they vote with the confidence that millions of other people will do the same and that way they will effect change (not that I think voting is a good way to do that, but that's besides the point). If we look at it in the other way, why don't you litter? You littering isn't going to trash the city. Why do you recycle? You recycling isn't going to have any impact on sustainability. Why don't you print your own fake money? You doing that won't have any noticeable impact on inflation. In the same way that doing bad stuff is still bad even if it's not going to have a large impact by itself, doing good things is still good even if they don't have a big impact by themselves.Railey2 wrote:
You misunderstand. Of course all votes as a whole matter. But fact is: Your vote doesn't change anything and you still can't affect how many people abstain, or who these people would vote for if they didn't abstain. Following the general maxim of "only meddle where you can change the outcome", this should lead to the rational conclusion that voting does, on an individual level, not matter.
This is not an example of cynicism, it's just viewing reality as it is. The outcome will be the same, doesn't matter if you're voting or not. You can't show me an example where a single vote among millions flipped a result because it's just so unlikely to happen that it never happens at all.
If you want to affect politics, you have to play bigger. Giving one vote doesn't do shit.
Isn't this exactly what a cynical view of the world is?Railey2 wrote:
This is not an example of cynicism, it's just viewing reality as it is. The outcome will be the same, doesn't matter if you're voting or not.
I understand your argument, Railey- the way you see it, if it doesn't come down to one single vote - yours - then your vote didn't actually affect the outcome.
The problem is that this lacks a "collective awareness", of sorts- as B1rd says, people just wouldn't vote if they thought this way, unless they thought themselves to be geniuses who can expertly tell an election's outcome prior to the results being tallied.
When it comes to collective contributions, the only thing that matters is that each individual does their part, not for themselves, but for the collective- votes use that kind of system.
(Also, gee, B1rd's been sounding incredibly progressive when talking about this subject. good job!)
Even trash has valueDaddyCoolVipper wrote:
(Also, gee, B1rd's been sounding incredibly progressive when talking about this subject. good job!)
remember, they call it a garbage can, not a garbage cannot
I like to strive towards progress, but I'm definitely not "progressive" in the political sense - I think that most of the recent societal trends have been regressive.
Two more pages!
If I remember correctly, you're a traditionalist. What kind of progress do you strive for?B1rd wrote:
I like to strive towards progress, but I'm definitely not "progressive" in the political sense - I think that most of the recent societal trends have been regressive.
Alright. Fuck. You win, just leave it alone you subhuman degenerate.Aurani wrote:
Yet you're my most loyal and devout slave.Hika wrote:
ah... I see your true colours.
Also just met someone who really likes Putin. Yuck.
I know nothing of politicsHika wrote:
Also just met someone who really likes Putin. Yuck.
Meme wise, he is awesome
not gonna lie best memes ever so maybe it's not half bad
Pls rename to ITT 2: We post shit that is either political or trash
fixedabraker wrote:
Pls rename to ITT 2: We post shit that is either trash or trash
What's the problem, did he hack you recently or something?Hika wrote:
Also just met someone who really likes Putin. Yuck.
I think some of the things in the past were better, though I'm not a conservative, I'm a Libertarian. In general I advocate for property rights and advocate against violent coercion.Foxtrot wrote:
If I remember correctly, you're a traditionalist. What kind of progress do you strive for?
cause Stalin is better so it offends me Putin a thing
abraker wrote:
Pls rename to ITT 2: We post shit that is either political or trash
I ONLY JUST SAW THAT ZAIN RENAMED TO KOLUCH I THOUGHT IT WAS JUST SOME FUNNY EDGY POLISH DUDE
The way you both argue against this suggest that you don't understand my reasoning. You could have easily answered all the questions raised in your posts yourselves.
It's completely irrelevant what's being voted on, for that matter. The fact is: Your vote doesn't change the outcome of the election in a meaningful way, and neither does it change how many people "think like that".
And it will never happen that "everyone thinks like that", which is also independent of how I vote. The non-voters will always be something between 30 and 50%, sometimes a bit lower sometimes a bit higher. But you get the point.
I don't really care about recycling because yes you're right: Doesn't really change anything. The only reason I recycle is because not recycling would get me into trouble with the city.
Lol fake money
I still want to live a moral life, so i don't do stuff that I think of as bad (mostly, heh)
Either way: Arguing with "the collective" is pointless because it's another thing that I can't meaningfully affect. If you had understood the argument, you would have understood that too.
If you want to convince me, you either have to argue how the maxim is wrong, or how my vote has a meaningful effect after all. That's the way to go against my argument.
Oh and btw. Voting does matter when it comes to local elections, for example, where only very few people vote. Or elections where you can predict the result to be INCREDIBLY close.
Cheers
Your vote doesn't change anything and you still can't affect how many people abstain, or who these people would vote for if they didn't abstain.B1rd wrote:
If everyone thought like you, then no one would vote or do anything. We wouldn't have the abolition of slavery or equality before the law because everyone would think "well one person isn't going to have an impact so I won't even try". No one votes because they think that their vote will change the outcome of an election, they vote with the confidence that millions of other people will do the same and that way they will effect change (not that I think voting is a good way to do that, but that's besides the point).
It's completely irrelevant what's being voted on, for that matter. The fact is: Your vote doesn't change the outcome of the election in a meaningful way, and neither does it change how many people "think like that".
And it will never happen that "everyone thinks like that", which is also independent of how I vote. The non-voters will always be something between 30 and 50%, sometimes a bit lower sometimes a bit higher. But you get the point.
I don't litter because I don't like seeing litter on the streets, it's ugly. Also: Unlike voting I'm having an immediate effect on other people because SOMEONE has to pick it up at the end of the day.B1rd wrote:
If we look at it in the other way, why don't you litter? You littering isn't going to trash the city. Why do you recycle? You recycling isn't going to have any impact on sustainability. Why don't you print your own fake money? You doing that won't have any noticeable impact on inflation. In the same way that doing bad stuff is still bad even if it's not going to have a large impact by itself, doing good things is still good even if they don't have a big impact by themselves.
I don't really care about recycling because yes you're right: Doesn't really change anything. The only reason I recycle is because not recycling would get me into trouble with the city.
Lol fake money
I still want to live a moral life, so i don't do stuff that I think of as bad (mostly, heh)
Either way: Arguing with "the collective" is pointless because it's another thing that I can't meaningfully affect. If you had understood the argument, you would have understood that too.
If you want to convince me, you either have to argue how the maxim is wrong, or how my vote has a meaningful effect after all. That's the way to go against my argument.
Oh and btw. Voting does matter when it comes to local elections, for example, where only very few people vote. Or elections where you can predict the result to be INCREDIBLY close.
Cheers
Lollol wrote:
I ONLY JUST SAW THAT ZAIN RENAMED TO KOLUCH I THOUGHT IT WAS JUST SOME FUNNY EDGY POLISH DUDE
lol wrote:
I ONLY JUST SAW THAT ZAIN RENAMED TO KOLUCH I THOUGHT IT WAS JUST SOME FUNNY EDGY POLISH DUDE
Aurani wrote:
On further inspection, it seems that my intuition was way off, and the infinitesimal chance that my vote matters actually amounts to something significant when multiplied with the potential benefit, after taking into account the probability of me voting for the wrong candidate.
http://lesswrong.com/lw/fao/voting_is_l ... ollars_to/
@vipper: This might be interesting to you. If you ever encounter something who argues like me, THIS is the resource to refer them to.
To spell out the equation:
Expected value of your vote =
P(vote being decisive)*(expected benefit of the better candidate over the worse candidate)*(P(of me picking the better candidate) - P(of me picking the worse candidate))
also linked in the article. That was essentially the model I had in my mind, although I didn't bother spelling it out or writing it down explicitly (shame for not even bothering to spell it out in this thread). I believed this to amount to almost nothing, rendering voting a useless action. Turns out it almost certainly doesn't amount to nothing.
Guess I'm a voter now. Although certainly not for any of the reasons that were brought forward by B1rd, of which I am still not sure if he understood the argument at all.
http://lesswrong.com/lw/fao/voting_is_l ... ollars_to/
@vipper: This might be interesting to you. If you ever encounter something who argues like me, THIS is the resource to refer them to.
To spell out the equation:
Expected value of your vote =
P(vote being decisive)*(expected benefit of the better candidate over the worse candidate)*(P(of me picking the better candidate) - P(of me picking the worse candidate))
also linked in the article. That was essentially the model I had in my mind, although I didn't bother spelling it out or writing it down explicitly (shame for not even bothering to spell it out in this thread). I believed this to amount to almost nothing, rendering voting a useless action. Turns out it almost certainly doesn't amount to nothing.
Guess I'm a voter now. Although certainly not for any of the reasons that were brought forward by B1rd, of which I am still not sure if he understood the argument at all.
^ fuck that's fire
this thread is becoming uuhhhh a shitty radical centrist circlejerk so please no more politics here. have a nice day.
I normally dislike vocals by FREDERIC seems pretty good
Oh no the Spaghetti guy has an opinion!Jordan wrote:
this thread is becoming uuhhhh a shitty radical centrist circlejerk so please no more politics here. have a nice day.
And there it is, glorious page 3333.
Three is the largest number still written with as many lines as the number represents.
To this day 3 is written as three lines in Roman and Chinese numerals. This was the way the Brahmin Indians wrote it, and the Gupta made the three lines more curved. The Nagari started rotating the lines clockwise and ending each line with a slight downward stroke on the right.
To this day 3 is written as three lines in Roman and Chinese numerals. This was the way the Brahmin Indians wrote it, and the Gupta made the three lines more curved. The Nagari started rotating the lines clockwise and ending each line with a slight downward stroke on the right.
Stephen CurryRailey2 wrote:
3333
333333333333333333333333
333333333333333333333
come join me on the far left frenJordan wrote:
this thread is becoming uuhhhh a shitty radical centrist circlejerk so please no more politics here. have a nice day.
3
33
333
3333
33333
333333
3333333
33333333
333333333
3333333333
333333333
33333333
3333333
333333
33333
3333
333
33
3
33
333
3333
33333
333333
3333333
33333333
333333333
3333333333
333333333
33333333
3333333
333333
33333
3333
333
33
3
As the initiator of Page 3333, I declare myself the lifetime president of this page.
Here's your oath lads:
I swear: I will be faithful and obedient to the leader of the German Empire and people, Aurani, to observe the law, remove Blitzfrog, all of his subhuman friends and to conscientiously fulfill my official duties, so help me God.
Here's your oath lads:
I swear: I will be faithful and obedient to the leader of the German Empire and people, Aurani, to observe the law, remove Blitzfrog, all of his subhuman friends and to conscientiously fulfill my official duties, so help me God.
In the news now: the unix timestamp is greater than 1500000000