Self Preservation vs Self Sacrifice

homo_homini_lupus · 2014-11-22T18:40:59+00:00

I am not saying this to be snarky, but this is a really ridiculous hypothetical

an_absolute_rose · 2014-11-22T18:39:17+00:00

Yo, which hand? Is it going to be cauterized and cleaned? Am I near a hospital? Why am I being detained? Why would they let me go if they cut off a hand?

goatismycopilot · 2014-11-22T21:23:44+00:00

But if terrorists are going to cut off your hands what will suddenly make them all nicey nice and let you go? And why are they cutting off your hands? And how is terrorist hand amputation going to be a socially sustainable act?

Reginleifer · 2014-11-22T18:45:37+00:00

Most likely mine, unless there was some exceptional circumstances (my hand being necessary to accomplish some other task/closest loved one had gangrene etc.)

For me this has nothing to do with being a red pill person but being a traditional man. A good father, a good uncle a good son, and a good friend. Although I will admit that the further off the relatedness scale we get, the more likely I'm willing to consider letting the other person take the hit.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kin_selection

Cutting off hands isn't socially sustainable, so I don't see how this matters, whether I choose myself to take the hit, or my closest loved one. What are you trying to compare spite vs altruism? Because both are incredibly stupid when taken to those extremes.

A completely altruist person completely ignores his/her needs and tends to either die stupidly or is outcompeteted by a selfish person, ending the transmission of any potential "altruist" gene.. A completely selfish society accomplishes nothing and spends energy and resources that a more harmonious society could pool together and wreck other societies with.

Really the only measure that matters in whether the hand cutting is sustainable is the characteristics of the people themselves. Is one person incompetent? Is one old and might not need that hand? How many remaining hands do you and the other person have? Is the hand necessary for some other purpose? Is one person say a surgeon? While the other merely a pianist?

Edit: Some "other" task. http://2.bp.blogspot.com/--oxLACJBNeQ/UXpY_bpit6I/AAAAAAAALXQ/YUU8EZc_T6Y/s1600/eyebrows.gif

GuildedCasket · 2014-11-23T03:29:54+00:00

My hand, easy - I'd rather suffer and have to adapt to a new situation than watch my partner suffer and experience that guilt.

It plays into RP because women supposedly are reluctant to sacrifice for their partners.

The society question makes no sense.

buartha · 2014-11-22T18:55:00+00:00

I'd probably go for cutting my own hand off, partially because I wouldn't want to see someone I love in pain, and partially because I think it would be the best decision all around. There two people in my life who could be called my closest loved ones, and one (my brother) is an electrician, so losing his hand would completely ruin his career, and the other wouldn't cope well at all with any kind of physical disability (my partner.) Plus, he's in finance, and people in that industry are like sharks smelling blood when it comes to weakness, and being perceived that way, and the confidence hit he'd take, could affect his career massively.

If it had been a year or two ago, it might have been a harder decision (though I would probably still go for my own,) but I'm at a stage in my PhD right now where I'm fairly sure I could get by with one hand and still finish. It would affect my desired career path, as I don't know if doing lab-based research long term could be pulled off with one hand, but unlike my partner I'm not nearly 2 decades into working towards my career goals so it wouldn't be quite such a blow, and because of my particular specialism and skills I do have a lot of options when it comes to work.

Plus, I can write with both my hands, so depending on the hand it would be less of a disadvantage to me than it would be to my partner (my brother can also write with both hands.)

I'd say my approach is pretty sustainable, as it takes into account who would be most negatively affected by the change.

As for whether it fits with my non RP beliefs, I guess so, but that doesn't mean I think that all or most RP types would go for the other option. I would tend to prefer suffering myself to seeing other people suffer, which seems to be a bit contrary to some RP attitudes, and if something's going to negatively affect another person more than it would me it doesn't make sense to me to pass the buck to them.

mitreddit · 2014-11-22T19:40:46+00:00

Mine. My husband has back problems. Too difficult to have back problems AND get used to a prosthetic.

I don't see how this choice impacts society at all.

adrixshadow · 2014-11-22T19:01:47+00:00

The lover. Although I may try to bite his neck off instead.

I am selfish, others might be selfless but that is not me.

Discussing if its socially sustainable is pointless, there are ways to cooperate that does not impart such negative effects. In fact the example shows criminal activity that would be fought against in a society. Ultimately there would be compromise and rules that we all agree on to enforce.

Red Pill will be more likely to be selfish since they could get another lover, in fact they would have multiple lovers in the first place.

Genetically speaking it will go with self preservation, that is what animals do.

Self Sacrifice isn't always a good thing as suicide bombers show.

DudeZoltan · 2014-11-22T21:40:38+00:00

What exactly are you gaining from answers to this question, if I may asked?

through_a_ways · 2014-11-22T22:26:24+00:00

Also, elaborate on whether your answer, if others answered the same, would be a socially sustainable model of behavior (i.e. would make society more or less functional).

Oh god, this reminds me of some ridiculous leftist writing prompt.

MissPearl · 2014-11-23T22:01:26+00:00

Mine. Hopefully the left one.

Generally the concept of a "loved one" implies "person to whom I would assume risk and danger for".

We both try to spare each other discomfort and make sacrifices for each other, and get pleasure from doing so. It appears to be sustainable behavior- and good that, for example he makes me soup when I feel like crap and I go to the pharmacy in hail to get him his medicine when he feels like crap. It means two genetically unrelated adults look out for each other.

I think it has dick all to do with which 'pill' I get filed under. I doubt most of you lot are that selfish- or would admit to being so.

Ignatius_Oh_Reilly · 2014-11-24T00:20:29+00:00

My hand but more out of honor than actually caring. I don't think I could live with myself knowing that I'm truly a coward.

Depends on their reasoning why. Either answer being majority view would allow society to be functional (functional defined as being able to maintain the current level of social and technological complexity).

SirNemesis · 2014-11-24T06:08:34+00:00

Neither. I don't negotiate with terrorists. If possible, I'll attempt a violent escape though. I think such a model is the most socially sustainable. Negotiating with them and playing their sadistic game will only encourage them to go on and harm others.

wombatinaburrow · 2014-11-24T10:43:35+00:00

If it meant that my husband and children were safe, I would take the hit.

n0c0ntr0l · 2014-11-24T13:31:23+00:00

Cut their hand off. I can find a new loved one, I can't get a new hand.

homo_homini_lupus · 2014-11-22T20:34:12+00:00

What does "socially sustainable" mean? Also are we detained in some way that completely precludes trying to fight? Not enough detail

Title	Self Preservation vs Self Sacrifice
Author	mitreddit
Upvotes	2
Comments	94
Date	November 22, 2014 6:27 PM UTC (11 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/PurplePillDebate
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/comments/2n3ikr/self_preservation_vs_self_sacrifice/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/PurplePillDebate/self-preservation-vs-self-sacrifice.284296 https://theredarchive.com/post/284296

Comments