Agree with this. Instead of redistributing respect, as I once thought we needed to do, we really just need to make more of it.https://twitter.com/patrickc/status/1052379958587224064 …
-
-
I think it's more like Rod says for now, but could be more like Patrick and Noah say in the future. I'd also say it's risky to assume the one without the other. If you think of a kind of debt/GDP situation then obligations rise hopefully less quickly than GDP over time.
-
This might be especially true in a world where creation becomes less capital intensive over time. However, currently there's still a good case for a certain amount of invalidation of certain things (take Saudi) and that gets done by peers, parents, justice, cops/armies, etc.
-
So, while I think it's true that growing the overall amount of respect is worth it, there's also the question of managing current obligations to ourselves and each other. In our current social framework, I don't see that getting done without some threat of invalidation.
-
And not just the threat of it, but it'd make sense (if that's a sensible framework to use) that there's active practising of it by the general population. Less and less over time, but not an either or right now. Of course, if my framing's wrong then that'd make this all BS. Ha.
-
That all said, I also hope the optimistic, creationary view gets acted on more and wins out in the end. I'd just spare a thought for Chesterton's fence in all this, so we know how to get where we're going in the least risky, most enjoyable way.
-
After reading it again and again though, I agree with what you guys are saying. I think my point kind of stands, but is off on some wayward tangent.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.