Conversation

Replying to and
Humans are a social species, but not *only* a social species. To optimize for friends is to become a sheep-logic degen and descend into hell-is-other-people slowly imagining you're being soulful and large-hearted in your approach to life.
1
8
Replying to
Hmm interesting. I was being more exploratory with this tweet than ideological. I think youre imagining a stance I’m not sure I have. I agree with most of Ben’s piece there already.
1
1
Replying to
"optimized for the friends you meet along the way as the only goal?" sounds pretty unambiguous to me :D isomorphic to "friendly ambitious nerd" thing, which also centers friendship in a way I find rather alarming as the raison d'etre of life itself
4
4
Replying to and
that's definitely true as well, but not what I'm flagging here. Even for very social friendly extrovert people who get a lot of energy from investing in friends, making that the *only* goal to optimize for is imo dangerous to the psyche, a kind of gollumizing one-ring effect
2
5
C'mon this is like a cartoon darwinism version of solve-for-friendship 🤣 "Only the friendliest survive!" "Survival of the friendliest!" "Friendliness selection!" "Nature red in tooth, claw, and LinkedIn connections!" The airport pop-sci book titles write themselves
1
1
Replying to and
Re: Darwinism we did seem to group-evolve to select for sociability. I think what used to be a survival tool became a subliminal goal in the infinite game sense, yeah. Good data also on popularity / talent / success (bad news for disagreeable people like me 😋)
1
I think any qualitative reduction of mechanics of evolution to a legible- stable objective function is basically not-even-wrong in the same way seeking "explainability" of AI is not-even-wrong. It's a narrative fallacy. There's no "hero trait" making evolution a hero's journey.
1
Show replies
Show replies