i stand with the philosophio-religio-pessimists but have a growing respect for these hardline utilitarians. especially the ones worried about all the people in the future who might not get to live if skynet happens. (that was the previous Aeon article I read. What is this curious magazine?)
― woof, Tuesday, 27 May 2014 14:36 (nine years ago) link
Beauty, knowledge, life, and the environment would to me seem intrinsic to true human well-being, not just survival. I mean obviously we have to take care of survival first, but the ideal world is one where everyone has the chance for happiness, (i.e. *thriving* rather than hedonism).
― zchyrs, Tuesday, 27 May 2014 14:37 (nine years ago) link
I have trouble thinking through some of their positions - how does this intersect with the law? Like if there were broadly victimless, lowish risk insurance or tax frauds that would give you extra money to give to de-worming charities, would you be you morally obliged to do that?
― woof, Tuesday, 27 May 2014 14:42 (nine years ago) link
This EA thing strikes me as weirdly anti-human for a type of humanitarianism.
― zchyrs, Tuesday, 27 May 2014 14:44 (nine years ago) link
why is distraction, ie absorption in art, not conducive to this in a brave new world sense?
― ryan, Tuesday, 27 May 2014 14:44 (nine years ago) link
doesn't minimizing suffering lead to some kind malthussian reverse repugnant conclusion where like - we should kill everyone so no one has to suffer anymore bc life after all is suffering?
― Mordy, Tuesday, 27 May 2014 14:48 (nine years ago) link
xpInefficient: opportunity cost of culture-production + substitutability of forms of distraction?
― woof, Tuesday, 27 May 2014 14:50 (nine years ago) link
I voted for Shruggie Otis, his art has reduced my suffering in life.
― Doritos Loco Parentis (Hurting 2), Tuesday, 27 May 2014 14:50 (nine years ago) link
there's the "anti-natalist" thing, mordy.
― ryan, Tuesday, 27 May 2014 14:52 (nine years ago) link
Schopenhauer otm
― Mordy, Tuesday, 27 May 2014 14:53 (nine years ago) link
i think the singerite EAs care primarily about what could be done about the suffering right now
they probably think it would be nice to be able to develop and pursue happiness or whatever in all these other ways
IF there weren't unnecessary unmitigated suffering that it would be a better use of our time/effort to take care of first
― j., Tuesday, 27 May 2014 14:53 (nine years ago) link
It seems to me that pretty much every cultural grouping of humans in the world devotes some time to making something that could be called "art" no matter how impoverished. Perhaps we should go lecture them about how they're wasting their time when they could be "alleviating suffering." It also seems to me that a life focused singlemindedly on improving physical and material well being is a life of mental suffering.
― Doritos Loco Parentis (Hurting 2), Tuesday, 27 May 2014 14:56 (nine years ago) link
art reduces suffering this question eats its own tail
― Now I Am Become Dracula (underrated aerosmith bootlegs I have owned), Tuesday, 27 May 2014 15:14 (nine years ago) link
some art increases suffering
― Mordy, Tuesday, 27 May 2014 15:16 (nine years ago) link
some things could do both! like junk food, maybe.
― ryan, Tuesday, 27 May 2014 15:17 (nine years ago) link
i love cheeseburgers but i am wracked by ethical guilt when i succumb to eating one. (though i guess the suffering of animals is being tabled for this discussion)
― ryan, Tuesday, 27 May 2014 15:18 (nine years ago) link
agree with the "anti-human" vibe I'm getting from this article. EA people quoted treat people as disposable machines who have an outside obligation to function at highest capacity to save other lives ... for what, for the lives saved to be disposable machines, too? cuz life without art, beauty, etc., would be pretty bland, there's probably a reason humans (and neanderthals!) got into this shit in the first place.
it seems like a weird combination of dehumanizing Anglo-American capitalism with "x lives saved" as profits returned. they don't even get into the classic problem of overpopulation ... the more lives you save, the more suffering you create in a world that can't handle everyone at once, particularly with climate change looking like it's irreversible. but these people don't seem to think that far! anyone who willingly devotes themselves to radicalism is going to have some screws loose, I guess.
― Spectrum, Tuesday, 27 May 2014 15:20 (nine years ago) link
Having EA explained to me by an adherent would increase my suffering.
― andrew m., Tuesday, 27 May 2014 16:21 (nine years ago) link
I don't think bill gates is a disciple but I suspect his foundation operates on similar principles, which leads to things like nuclear advocacy, which I'm going to assume he's done the research and has seen it as the rational way forward but it just strikes me as the same kind of lack of imagination for something greater that results in shitty windows that makes me worry that we will see shitty but rational cost effective philanthropy dominating just by the sheer weight of his foundation
― Philip Nunez, Tuesday, 27 May 2014 16:30 (nine years ago) link
On the other hand it is really hard to argue against eradicating polio malaria etc
― Philip Nunez, Tuesday, 27 May 2014 16:33 (nine years ago) link
lol nerds
― difficult listening hour, Tuesday, 27 May 2014 16:44 (nine years ago) link
Here’s a simple test to determine if you’re creating art for yourself or for the world.
can i post my percentage on facebook
― difficult listening hour, Tuesday, 27 May 2014 16:46 (nine years ago) link
‘It’s hard to see how a vase or something would really impact culture in any one way, because what does it teach you about life?’
Isn't there a very famous poem about that?
― jmm, Tuesday, 27 May 2014 16:52 (nine years ago) link
lol consequentialists
― bands poll (Noodle Vague), Tuesday, 27 May 2014 16:53 (nine years ago) link
i like that the liberal-capitalist ideal of the artist (teaching people that gays are good, encouraging the altruistic pursuit of money) is so close to the stalinist one (the engineer of the soul)
― difficult listening hour, Tuesday, 27 May 2014 16:58 (nine years ago) link
First, afaics nothing is going to stop people from creating art of some kind. We've been doing it since approximately 30,000 years ago. Suggesting that we stop this activity is like King Knut commanding the waves to turn back.
Second, the argument that the creation of art is squandering some vast amount of resources that could effectively be used to reduce suffering seems very poorly grounded. The resources required to create many forms of art, e.g a dance, a poem, a song, are effectively nil. You don't need anything but your own mind and body. The amounts of money paid for certain art objects applies to such a tiny range of artistic output it is ridiculous to equate this with "art" as a whole.
Third, the idea of diverting economic resources to altruistic uses is quite vague. Who would get these resources and how would they be used to reduce suffering in a community? The only model I can see for such resource use are NGOs such as Oxfam or Red Crescent. If an entire new apparatus is envisioned, I would like to know what it would be.
If NGOs are indeed the model, then it is a highly problematic model as the instrument to address human suffering as a whole.
Lastly, if we are going to stop one human endeavor and divert all its resources to combating suffering, I'd suggest stopping war and disbanding all national armed forces. Just the cessation of war would bring an instant reduction of suffering, without reference to spending military resources for anything else.
― Aimless, Tuesday, 27 May 2014 17:12 (nine years ago) link
NB: If the EAs want to increase happiness, how would ridding the world of art accomplish that?
― Aimless, Tuesday, 27 May 2014 17:16 (nine years ago) link
they apparatuses are named in the article, aimless. i think they are like oxfam etc. but with some modern datacentric junk thrown in to determine effectiveness etc.
i don't think they want to rid the world of art, there's plenty of it already, the question is how to spend your time from here on out given what else you could be doing
― j., Tuesday, 27 May 2014 17:20 (nine years ago) link
there's plenty of it already
this only applies to a consumerist model of art. the joy of making art can never be exhausted.
― Aimless, Tuesday, 27 May 2014 17:30 (nine years ago) link
I vote for EA Sports because Tiger Woods PGA Tour 2010 has reduced suffering in my life
― rip van wanko, Tuesday, 27 May 2014 17:33 (nine years ago) link
A wholly utilitarian critique of art was already developed under Marxism-Leninism. This seems to be animated by a similar spirit. I don't mind this sort of thinking when it is applied as the expression of a personal ethic. Where it seems out of joint is its implicit claim to a set of first principles that should be applied prescriptively to everyone everywhere. It seems much too spindly for that.
― Aimless, Tuesday, 27 May 2014 17:54 (nine years ago) link
if this movement makes Chris Martin never want to sing again I say FULL STEAM AHEAD
― getting strange ass all around the globe (Neanderthal), Tuesday, 27 May 2014 18:01 (nine years ago) link
― woof
thanks for linking to that, awesome article
― go to evangelical agonizing eternal hell (Karl Malone), Tuesday, 27 May 2014 18:20 (nine years ago) link
I'm sorry but 'value over replacement altruist' is one of the more disgustingly wrongheaded metrics I've come across in the whole rationalization-of-charitable-giving field
― explaining "ladder theory" to my girlfriend (bernard snowy), Tuesday, 27 May 2014 18:42 (nine years ago) link
(probly doesn't help that I find sweeping prescriptions about charity vulgar to begin with)
― explaining "ladder theory" to my girlfriend (bernard snowy), Tuesday, 27 May 2014 18:45 (nine years ago) link
‘I myself was extremely interested in evolutionary biology,’ Wiblin said, ‘and I would have liked to become an academic in that area. But I couldn’t really justify it on the effects that it has on helping other people, even though I found it fascinating.’
― explaining "ladder theory" to my girlfriend (bernard snowy), Tuesday, 27 May 2014 18:47 (nine years ago) link
i remember arguing against baking pizza for a school fundraiser when we sucked at baking pizza, but I was overruled, so we baked some awful pizza and maybe made back the cost of ingredients in sales, and i do feel a lot of art does tend to fall in the category of baking sucky pizza, and our sucky pizza, if it was an art movement, was on the vanguard of suckism.
― Philip Nunez, Tuesday, 27 May 2014 18:49 (nine years ago) link
I have calculated that if all the moments annually spent picking one's nose were aggregated and monetized effectively by all 7 billion humans, with the proceeds redirected toward ending suffering, it could feed nearly 1.35 million people or vaccinate 3.62 million children. To say nothing whatsoever about masturbation.
― Aimless, Tuesday, 27 May 2014 18:50 (nine years ago) link
I assume that 'effective altruists' also extend this principle to other areas of human activity: friends, relationships, children, etc. Having and raising a child in the First World is surely a far greater drain on time and resources than writing music or dancing.
xposts
― EveningStar (Sund4r), Tuesday, 27 May 2014 18:51 (nine years ago) link
i dunno, i find you can save a lot of time by being a really half-arsed parent
― bands poll (Noodle Vague), Tuesday, 27 May 2014 18:52 (nine years ago) link
xpost to sund4r: yeah it seems like either their movement or this article has conflated "art" with "romantic individualism"
― explaining "ladder theory" to my girlfriend (bernard snowy), Tuesday, 27 May 2014 18:54 (nine years ago) link
fwiw, I occasionally style myself a writer, and I am already quite capable of objecting to my own work on the grounds of its uselessness & fungibility thankyouverymuch
― explaining "ladder theory" to my girlfriend (bernard snowy), Tuesday, 27 May 2014 18:56 (nine years ago) link
Like if there were broadly victimless, lowish risk insurance or tax frauds that would give you extra money to give to de-worming charities, would you be you morally obliged to do that?
Yeah, these jobs that generate lots of money which is then used for altruistic purposes: where is the money coming from? Are they really sure that large sums of money are being generated in this global economy without exploitation and suffering?
And in order for someone to become a successful, world-beating, big-money artist (whose life is then justified), don't they usually need to go through stages of being mediocre and struggling to improve, of cranking out failed drafts?
― EveningStar (Sund4r), Tuesday, 27 May 2014 19:09 (nine years ago) link
It would take a lot to convince me that someone who does not value art wd be at all effective at reducing human suffering
― nova ydal (Drugs A. Money), Tuesday, 27 May 2014 19:15 (nine years ago) link
"sure, the guys who build the roads I drive on to get to my lucrative programming job have kids whose clothing comes from a donation box; but it's okay because I'm living off Walmart canned goods and sending half my income to Africa!"
― explaining "ladder theory" to my girlfriend (bernard snowy), Tuesday, 27 May 2014 19:25 (nine years ago) link
It is in the interests of becoming irreplaceable that a lot of EAs promote ‘earning to give’ – getting a well-paid job and donating carefully. If you score a lucrative programming job and then give away half your income, most of your competition probably wouldn’t have donated as much money. As far as the great universal calculation of utility is concerned, you have made yourself hard to replace. Artists, meanwhile, paint the beautiful landscape in front of them while the rest of the world burns.
as opiates for programmers go i guess this is better than thinking yr apps themselves are disrupting everyone in africa into happiness
― difficult listening hour, Tuesday, 27 May 2014 19:26 (nine years ago) link
funny tho that these guys think they have a lot of evangelizing to do to convince society that making money is a moral imperative and art is a waste of time. uphill work!
― difficult listening hour, Tuesday, 27 May 2014 19:29 (nine years ago) link
Are they really sure that large sums of money are being generated in this global economy without exploitation and suffering?
― Griðian and friðian and takin' the piðian (Michael White), Tuesday, 27 May 2014 19:31 (nine years ago) link
I'm not sure the idea of valuing something (beauty, truth, the environment) "in itself" or "for its own sake", taken to mean separately from any experience of contemplating, enjoying, or appreciating it, is coherent at all.
The main problem with Effective Altruism, as it comes across in that article, is that it promotes a vision of morally respectable life that is destined to have only a handful of adherents, and therefore a severely limited impact. Encouraging people of means to tithe 10% of their income to good causes is bound to be more effective than telling people that they are morally sub-standard if they don't throw themselves into lucrative pursuits they don't enjoy for the sake of charitable giving.
I mean, this remark--"If you accept the shallow-pond analogy, everyone is morally horrific"--is just kind of a stupid thing to say. (And not only because it's false.)
― JRN, Tuesday, 27 May 2014 19:38 (nine years ago) link
I've only heard of one person ever doing the ascetic lifestyle, donating income to charity thing, and it was only for a year, but he got written up in the papers. All I remembered was it involved a lot of oatmeal.
― Philip Nunez, Tuesday, 27 May 2014 19:47 (nine years ago) link
Xpost Don't shit on Bette Midler yo
― 100 Percent That Grinch (Neanderthal), Friday, 13 December 2019 18:50 (four years ago) link
El Tomboto can and prolly will answer this but no, El Tomboto emphatically does not live in Alexandria
― Hereward the Woke (Ye Mad Puffin), Friday, 13 December 2019 20:14 (four years ago) link
I was mistaken. That's what I get for playing at Where's Waldo with an ilxor.
― A is for (Aimless), Friday, 13 December 2019 20:22 (four years ago) link
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/06/t-magazine/romantic-relationships.html
Q: Can you help with art suggestions for my severe fear of engulfment when it comes to being involved with someone romantically? This leads me to miss out on opportunities to be with really great guys with whom I connect initially. — Elizabeth, New York CityA: In some ways I am the wrong person to answer this question, as all my life I have willingly gone headlong in search of engulfment. Of course there’s fear. If nothing is at stake — if there’s no risk of grief and desolation when you come out the other side — how can you ever really feel anything? To be wholly dissolved and lost, whether in another person or in the presence of a work of art, in a spiritual encounter or in a greater cause: This can be dangerous, but also freeing — an escape from the prison of the self. You should not be able to walk away unscathed, which is to say, unchanged.
A: In some ways I am the wrong person to answer this question, as all my life I have willingly gone headlong in search of engulfment. Of course there’s fear. If nothing is at stake — if there’s no risk of grief and desolation when you come out the other side — how can you ever really feel anything? To be wholly dissolved and lost, whether in another person or in the presence of a work of art, in a spiritual encounter or in a greater cause: This can be dangerous, but also freeing — an escape from the prison of the self. You should not be able to walk away unscathed, which is to say, unchanged.
― j., Friday, 7 February 2020 00:29 (four years ago) link
Nothing to do with the thread subject, but you can put a hell of a lot of skin in the game and risk plenty of grief when you come out the other side without seeking "engulfment". That sounds rather unhealthy to me. The words to describe what I seek are more on the order of "complete engagement with and commitment to" my relationship.
― A is for (Aimless), Friday, 7 February 2020 01:22 (four years ago) link
i think a primary objective of much art, and a silver lining of darker art, is reduction of suffering by reminding us we're not alone, or simarly, "the only one"
― otm into winter (rip van wanko), Friday, 7 February 2020 01:26 (four years ago) link
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/18/opinion/sonny-rollins-art.html
When I go to the museum and I look at a piece of art, I’m transported. I don’t know how, or where, but I know that it’s not a part of the material world. It’s beyond modern culture’s political, technological soul. We’re not here to live forever. Humans and materialism die. But there’s no dying in art.
― j., Monday, 18 May 2020 15:14 (three years ago) link
wow
― jmm, Monday, 18 May 2020 15:48 (three years ago) link
eating breakfast is a waste of time; reducing coronavirus infections is all that mattera
― Wuhan!! Got You All in Check (Camaraderie at Arms Length), Monday, 18 May 2020 16:24 (three years ago) link
tom morello, 1992 pic.twitter.com/jBHKMJKVZ1— chelsea (@cheIseahaynes) June 6, 2020
― j., Saturday, 6 June 2020 19:41 (three years ago) link
is sex important or is reducing suffering all that mattersis ilxor.com importantare hot dogs important
― i will FP you and your entire family (rip van wanko), Saturday, 6 June 2020 20:22 (three years ago) link
has hip hop helped reduce suffering of those who feel suppressed, powerless, trapped, unheard
the cure helps me especially when I was younger
― i will FP you and your entire family (rip van wanko), Saturday, 6 June 2020 20:25 (three years ago) link
i like that tom morello quote tho it does little to explain audioslave
― methinks dababy doth bop shit too much (m bison), Saturday, 6 June 2020 23:40 (three years ago) link
well, in 1996, there was no indication they were going to happen.
― maffew12, Sunday, 7 June 2020 00:28 (three years ago) link
I know ilx likes to ride for this dude and ratm is alright but his singer-songwriter material is some of the most execrable music I have ever heard
― Paul Ponzi, Sunday, 7 June 2020 00:31 (three years ago) link
why are you always such a wet blanket, paul ponzi
― j., Sunday, 7 June 2020 00:34 (three years ago) link
perhaps he is suffering
― A is for (Aimless), Sunday, 7 June 2020 00:35 (three years ago) link
does that mean that we have to
― j., Sunday, 7 June 2020 00:36 (three years ago) link
yes, if are we sentient
― A is for (Aimless), Sunday, 7 June 2020 00:37 (three years ago) link
One man's suffering is another man's reverse schadenfreude.
― pomenitul, Sunday, 7 June 2020 00:41 (three years ago) link
his singer-songwriter material is some of the most execrable music I have ever heard
Singer-songwriter music is a pestilence.
― but also fuck you (unperson), Sunday, 7 June 2020 13:02 (three years ago) link
except when it's the best stuff ever
― i will FP you and your entire family (rip van wanko), Sunday, 7 June 2020 13:15 (three years ago) link
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/08/magazine/what-do-we-mean-when-we-call-art-necessary.html
The prospect of “necessary” art allows members of the audience to free themselves from having to make choices while offering the critic a nifty shorthand to convey the significance of her task, which may itself be one day condemned as dispensable. The effect is something like an absurd and endless syllabus, constantly updating to remind you of ways you might flunk as a moral being. It’s a slightly subtler version of the 2016 marketing tagline for the first late-night satirical news show with a female host, “Full Frontal With Samantha Bee”: “Watch or you’re sexist.”
― j., Monday, 15 June 2020 16:11 (three years ago) link
I LOVE music. I’ve essentially dedicated my life to it.. but no song has ever changed the world, not even “We Are The World”— mrk (@MerkSays) June 17, 2020
false
― j., Wednesday, 17 June 2020 20:51 (three years ago) link
What the hell is “changing the world” anyway
― all cats are beautiful (silby), Wednesday, 17 June 2020 21:01 (three years ago) link
true
― j., Wednesday, 17 June 2020 21:02 (three years ago) link
You must ain’t never heard “OLD TOWN ROAD” 🙄— OG $ILKY PSALM ONE 👩🏾🔬 (@PsalmOne) June 17, 2020
― Dig Dug the police (Neanderthal), Wednesday, 17 June 2020 21:06 (three years ago) link
I have heard tell of a guitar that kills fascists.
Are you suggesting that this is not so?
― Okay, Boomerang (Ye Mad Puffin), Thursday, 18 June 2020 00:46 (three years ago) link
lol this thread is an ilx first mention for “Effective Altruism”. The original article has disappeared, so THANK GOD for the Internet Archive Wayback Machine.
https://web.archive.org/web/20140322045146/http://aeon.co/magazine/living-together/art-is-a-selfish-waste-of-time-says-effective-altruism/
― Mr. Snrub, Friday, 2 December 2022 23:52 (one year ago) link