The Prejudice of Naïve Optimism
Hadn't thought of the eternal optimist, those that actually believe Government is good, today's medicine is faultless and that any discussion to the contrary is met with a waiving hand dismissal as a selfish person, (read irrational self interest; sparing themselves pain or cognitive dissonance. I have met a few and the only reason I engaged them in the first place is to gauge their perceived expertise in terms of the discussion to be had...it's just plain frustrating. I am not the kind of person that has the ability to tip toe around someone's ego.
I also recognize that being equally pessimistic is equally bad. I try and try not always successfully, to be aware of both sides of an issue, but we need not gauge anything on a balanced scale of good and bad.
What do You think?
I also recognize that being equally pessimistic is equally bad. I try and try not always successfully, to be aware of both sides of an issue, but we need not gauge anything on a balanced scale of good and bad.
What do You think?
As an addendum: Very few of us are totally rational. If we were, the words optimism and pessimism wouldn't exist.
It is a virtue to be negative toward things that are wrong (such as the welfare state, or a con man's trick, etc.
Eternal Optimism and the belief that we can reach perfection if we only try hard enough, is one of the reasons we are in the pickle we are in today.
This is one of the reasons the Founders to me were nothing short of brilliant. They started with the ideal, but recognized the fallibility of man (especially in seeking for power) and made accommodations (more especially limitations) in the structure of government to account for this fallibility.
- Sports team - We'll have brats, cheese, and beer regardless of how the team does.
- Complaint about a person - Try to find some way to use their idiosyncrasies constructively or spend time with other people. That may mean firing them or something, which is sad, but it's better than keeping them around grudgingly and keeping them from doing something they might be really good at.
- Traffic is bad - A reason to telecommute or keep an unusual early or late schedule. A way to listen to books on audio.
- Gov't - Support someone you know running for office who will do a better job. Go to fundraisers and give a politician and/or her staff a piece of your mind, and try to come away from the event with a good business connection or new friend.
- Medical errors - Try to figure out the facts, take action, and accept that humans are flawed and scientific knowledge by its nature is a work in progress.
As the article says, “everything will be okay" is nonsense. But on a fundamental level, there's no point in ruminating about things not being okay-- a horrible disease, accident, random crime, or whatever. Maybe one will get you before you finish whatever project your working on. It's good to make a succession plan for that, but then you move on and get things done.
There's no point in constantly spinning on how it sucks to be born in a time when gov't takes a third of your earnings, just as there's no point in constantly spinning on how blessed we are to live a in a time with a concept of individual rights rather than a time of slavery and divine right of kings.
I think there's enormous value in something I would call "naive optimism". It's esp common in young people. They have no thought that the venture they're working on will most likely fail. They just work on it. And sometimes they make a company like Google.
Naive optimism would state: (if I fully understand the article), everything is fine the way it is...we don't need a thing called, Google, would be a better example of this concept.
Follow up question: Do you think this article correctly describes the present day culture of the younglings that need safe spaces?
I think is more complicated than that myself.
Oh yes, not by the definition of the article. It's just what I would call it in my own words, maybe a poor choice of words on my part. Many reasonable people would say "it's fine to try a new search engine but Yahoo, Altavista, and Lycos have that market totally locked up. And while the Internet is neat, can we be sure there's really profit in it or is it more akin to the Home Shopping Network."
"Do you think this article correctly describes the present day culture of the younglings that need safe spaces?"
My first thought is that it does not. It seems like they are very nervous that they can't handle the world. So I wouldn't expect them to be optimistic. OTOH, I do not understand them. I was on this web site saying the whole concept was bogus four years ago. I thought it was just people who wanted to say patently racist, violent, or otherwise offensive things and were told they went beyond the bounds of free speech. I was completely wrong. There are young adults who literally have never dealt with any decision or conflict without their mother present.
I am very interested in how the same people who need safe spaces might paradoxically have naive optimism, perhaps as a coping mechanism or something.
I'm thinking that their naive optimism might relate to socialism, equality of outcome and a brave new one world, open boarder and multicultural with no property, common language or pride in achievement.
It might. I've only even been aware of this phenomenon for a couple years now, and I don't understand it.
But I don't see these young adults having grand ideas about those things. I suppose I could see them going along with authoritarianism, including nationalism or socialism, but I don't see them as likely to be fired up about it as young Gen-Xers were.
I'm for open borders, multiculturalism, languages mixing organically, and pride in achievement, so I wouldn't notice those things.
I will be watching it. I am very confused by this phenomenon. I think of things like a young man being embarrassed if he has to call his mom to handle some basic problem as a fact of life. There are many kids today who would hardly see a reason to be embarrassed. Their moms have been a shirpa all their lives taking them and their stuff from one structured activity to another. The thought of putting their stuff in a bag and jumping on a bus alone is frighting, as it would be for a normal 10 year old, but they're teens and young adults.
Oh crap, I just said "kids today", and I swore when I was young I would not say that. So I try to reserve judgment. I do not get the new ways of doing things.
We can't have open borders till everyone respects the property of others...might take another 1000 yrs.
America is one culture made up of many just as the English language is made of many languages.
We have a long way to go before everyone understands the issues at hand and what is needed to change/evolve before they could actually live that way globally.
In the mean time, America has already achieved much of that.
"before they could actually live that way globally."
In 1850 major events could occur in Europe, and news would take weeks to travel to the US by ships. People could buy a newspaper in New York, travel a long distance, and then sell the paper to people who wanted to learn what happened three weeks ago. When they put the transatlantic cable in, the engineers debated the type of coating, whether to just boost the voltage or make a more sensitive receiver. They went way over budget. The first attempt only worked for a few days and could not even send a work a minute. There was a lot of fanfare though about the amazing technology.
Given technology's rate of growth, if I have a long life, I think borders will be mostly gone by the time I die. In modern times we do screen-sharing calls, send CAM files, and fly to visit our colleagues on the other side other side of the world without a second thought. Even going over the North Pole, I have Internet access, and desk that converts into a bed. Once I was sending software builds to a colleague testing a prototype while over the ocean, and we didn't think much of it. People around the world are aware of when Chinese New Year and Christmas are coming, trying to get things done before things slow down for the holidays. It seems like that ship sailed long ago. We live globally right now. Maybe the elite did 30 years ago, but now it's most everyone. If I can send CAM files instantly for free, even from a plane, going through customs and passport control seems like a pointless bureaucratic exercise.
The muslim populations create little communities of their own in Europe and you have to abide by them in that community.
That kind of multiculturalism/ open borders doesn't work.
The socialism doesn't work, i.e. demanding things instead of freely offering something to someone who willingly provides. Open boarders and pluralism are part of the creative engine of humankind.
Again, America kind of has that between the states, (or republics) but the world does not have that between countries therefore borders are a necessary hindrance.
Also, 60% of the world has yet to reach a meaningful level of consciousness and much of that 60% are still bicamerally barbaric by comparison and it is observable that mere exposure to the modern so called conscious world is not enough to evolve their behavior.
Until everyone respects the property of others and are willing and able to take care of themselves, open borders will only propagate more and more, a burden upon those that can and do take care of themselves.
I am really tired of taking care of everyone else by force when I can hardly take care of myself properly. I like many other conscious human value creators would be more than willing to help others not so fortunate in our local communities, if the values I create and earn weren't "Taken" from me. One can not help others if one has no abundance to voluntarily share if one wishes to do so.
The internet allows everyone to buy and sell freely across the borders of countries and also makes, so called, "Trade Deals" obsolete.
If only that were true. If only the people who didn't respect property were on one side of a line and those who did were in a Gulch, Seastead, zone franca, or something like that!
"open borders will only propagate more and more, a burden"
I hear this from my colleagues in Europe. It goes something like this: Of course I believe everyone has a right to healthcare, education, a living wage, and to retire with dignity at a reasonable age, but those systems in our country can only absorb so many people. We can't have completely open borders. To me this means they like the notion of a "right" to those goods and services, but they don't really believe in it when it's tested. From the train travelling from Gothenburg to Malmo last year I saw neo-Nazis in KKK-style white hoods. My colleagues there said they were Nazi's protesting the burden immigrants place on their welfare system. I see a connection between a comprehensive welfare system and those KKK people.
"The internet allows everyone to buy and sell freely across the borders of countries and also makes, so called, "Trade Deals" obsolete."
I agree. I think they'll disappear in my lifetime.