If you make the mistake of listening to a peasant talk about purpose, your [[true]] [[higher]] purpose will always be, they say, to do ingroup things and not outgroup things. To play the game the best, to be the rat that comes in first (but don't forget the local mortals will always verbally claim everyone comes in first).
You may notice this is feminine conformity. Mildly masculinized precisely because egalitarianism isn't true - not everyone can conform, which produces a conformity leaderboard and thus competitive conformity.
It makes them very literally slaves to whoever decides what it means to be high status.
A status striver will tell you they want to be the queen bee or the madam of the whorehouse, the one who makes the rules. This would be hilariously unselfaware if it wasn't so cringe. The rules they make are also conformist. They try to make the exact rules they're [[supposed]] to make. Whoops.
You can see this easily in juvenile fiction a lot. Their power fantasy is that they get to enforce the things mom told them to do. "I'm going to go and kill rapists and slavers!" Such subtle, sophisticated social commentary. Yeah attacking universally reviled criminals is really speaking truth to power... I bet you'll really stand up for the downtrodden next by condemning shoplifting. P.S. Why the fuck does English have a three-syllable word for 'theft'; plz let me kill anyone who uses it, I want right of first execution.
Strivers won't even admit someone does make the rules. That is perhaps the whole point of the idea of [[morality]] (as apart from local mores) they see rules as external and objective, handed down from some noninterventionist deity.
As, I mean, duh. Of course one of the rules the status-maker will make is, "There is no man behind the curtain."
It's sufficiently funny that I can make that universal cultural reference and the strivers still don't get it.
If you decide what is and isn't higher status, you first have to be the kind of person who can. And if you can do that, then you don't have to wait for permission to determine what is high-status for yourself. Simply make whatever you're already doing higher status. Bingo bango.
It should be possible for anyone to do this. It is not technically difficult. "I'm the decider now. I decide the rule is I'm the best. Neato, game over." And yet...
Well, zombies gonna rot. Brainless undead obviously can't make any decisions except what their necromancer has already decided for them. Zombies cannot cooperate any more than individual fingernails can cooperate. They are nothing more than an extension of another's will.
4 comments:
one time pancake noticed strivers really like running.
i noticed this is because running is a singular action with a clear metric. it can't be weightlifting or swimming or cycling, because then there's a second action or object, it has to be running.
the ai paperclip scenario is just them talking about themselves.
ala wowex "devouring mother archetype":
"the constant talk about "staying hungry" ala strivers and grifters is feminine.
they're all wannabe queen bees. they maintain the status quo.
everything fits
or at the very least when i think about gain and money i am not thinking about food or my gut at all. and if i am hungry i am certainly not capable of better execution or novel ideas.
"it's just a metaphor" and how did that metaphor come about? why that metaphor and not another metaphor? oh it doesn't matter? just follow the crowd and don't think about it too much? what a coincidence
fucking baldies piss me off
that one clip from some movie of some conductor yelling at his band/orchestra is always posted and has always struck me as worthless and now i know why
same with "war is the mother of invention"
war and necessity don't have anything to do with invention
they do have to do with killing off the weak first, i.e. the parasites, and then the inventors don't have to carry a thousand bureaucrats on their backs, and then they're able to do things like they've always wanted, which now looks like an "invention""
The paperclip AI folk talking about themselves are even worse than strivers. Mindless, unliving, causing pain on purpose, insofar as they can be said to have a purpose. Causing it not because they like causing pain or for the sake of pain; they don't like anything, they don't dislike anything, they don't care about the sake of anything, because they don't care about anything. Simply because pain-causing is what they do.
https://falkenblog.blogspot.com/2010/03/why-envy-dominates-greed.html
Post a Comment