somebody's comment yesterday got me reading Kierkegaard's "Purity of Heart" essay and my fucking god i have not wanted to slap the shit out of a dead man so badly since the last time i read more than three words of Kant at once
-
Show this thread
-
Replying to @chaosprime
So where did Kierkegaard go wrong? I would really like to know.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @Mondo_dj
where the mindset that produced this essay, at least, went wrong was in the pious pretense that ~willing the Good~ for its own sake rather than reward-seeking is in any way not a sneakier species of reward-seeking where you get to jerk yourself off about how pure of heart you are
5 replies 0 retweets 10 likes -
Replying to @chaosprime
I dig. I can see how the two might be connected as well. The question we might become a little clearer when you consider someone who pursues honor strictly for selfless reasons and not personal gain. Can such a person exists in our society?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Mondo_dj
this person is either trivially possible in our society or impossible in any society someone pursuing honor for no visible personal gain is pursuing it to obtain rewards internal to themselves, and if they're wired so that works for them they're extremely rational to do so
2 replies 0 retweets 7 likes
so the question is just whether you qualify those rewards as selfish or selfless but probably the question is itself merely a cognitive security exploit
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.