[FoRK] New Benefits of Marriage Study Actually Hints at the Horrors of Middle Age

Lucas Gonze lucas.gonze at gmail.com
Fri Jan 23 09:48:43 PST 2015


My understanding of “strictly competitive” is that there is no such thing as mutual wins. A winner means a loser. There are no win-win situations.

That’s what I read in conservative thought: a feeling that seeking win-win situations is code for seeking a loss, throwing a game, handing somebody else a win.


On January 23, 2015 at 9:27:03 AM, Stephen D. Williams (sdw at lig.net) wrote:

On 1/23/15 9:13 AM, Lucas Gonze wrote:
On January 23, 2015 at 8:31:15 AM, Stephen D. Williams (sdw at lig.net) wrote:
Whether that is a problem that you think needs addressed depends on whether you think the world is strictly competitive, whether you 
feel indirectly enriched or diminished by it, and similar philosophical motivations. We'll take it as a given that you care for 
your own children and family. Do you care about other people's children and people in general as an extended family? Do you feel 
any responsibility to them? 
sdw, I think you have two mutually exclusive points here. One is about whether the world is strictly competitive, so that mutual enrichment is impossible. The other is about helping others without benefit to yourself.



Mutually exclusive?  Do you mean orthogonal?
If I think the world is strictly competitive, I could decide to help others or not.  I might think helping would or would not have a benefit to me even then.  If I don't think it is strictly competitive, I likewise could think either way.  If I don't think it is strictly competitive I may be more likely to think there might be an indirect benefit.  However, unless there are only two players involved, there is always the possibility of gaining relative to others than the giver and givee.

sdw



More information about the FoRK mailing list