Schopenhauer on Steroids 1: Love, Society, Nature v Nurture, and The Root of Evil

Tl;dr: Everyone deserves to be loved, without exception. I start with explaining how people know they should be kind and compassionate, yet how they act irrationality in a way that is inconsistent with the values they endorse, why I think so, my own definition of these terms, as well as how we could create a better society by being more kind and compassionate, and instead of avoiding and punishing evil post hoc, just trying to prevent and help people, just fix it and eradicate al evil from it’s root, while at the same time creating a more accommodating and peaceful society. /tl;dr

For a more comprehensive yet still very brief version and overview of this post and others in the same series, check out the last section of my post 'The Diary of an Autistic Kid': just search for the first occurrence of the word 'Hitler' on the page and start reading from that section.

New to this blog? Start here.

This is one of my more dense posts, and might come off as pessimistic to some, but just as always I try to be perfectly logical, yet if you consider yourself someone easily influenced by ideas that you come across and that sound good, or even have the slightest doubt in your ability to hold a belief at a distance and scrutinize it before adopting it and not acting upon anything that your intuitive mind tells you to, then I would strongly encourage you to stop reading right here and go back, train yourself in critical thinking, or maybe not, but don't read it otherwise, you have been warned, and unlike my other posts, this is not sarcasm.

It's like a darker (but realistic with the expected amount of emotional affect produced by all words commensurate with the gap between how pressing I feel the issue is and how I perceive other people thinking how pressing the issue is.) and more detailed, and so it's a pity that it also happens to have one of the more interesting titles in my blog, which is why I felt obligated to include a preface like that, not to scare you off or anything, because I know that if you're one of the few people who happen to come across my blog, you most likely are intelligent and rational enough to read and critique me with constructive criticism and feedback, so I'd say please go ahead and let me know what you think, I'd like to know.

To get it out of the way first: No, I've not read much written by Schopenhauer, and no, this title isn't clickbait, it's me using the title I like, which is why I'm clarifying; I just know enough that he's known for his pessimism, and I do intend to read more of him in the near future, but for now I don't wish to make anyone who reads the title think that there are any deeper associations between my ideas and the works of Schopenhauer, though I think it'd be nice to not let y'all know that and see some of the more creative and philosophical-minded people come up with some clever associations and rationalizations and parallels between this post and Schopenhauer.

And at the same time it'd be tempting to say that yeah I intended that, but that's not how it works, and I like being honest even in such fun situations, which is one of the reasons I was one of the less popular kids back when I cared about such nonsense, which I'm glad I do not now, and before I go off on a tangent and forget where I even started or what I intended to write, let's get started. It's not even a fraction of the stuff that my brain thinks. Might come off as a rant or emotional vent to some, which it kind of is, but not without logic and ideas that I want everyone to grasp and be aware of because the cost of ignorance is too much, as I shall attempt to explain throughout this post.

I am open to constructive criticism and any comments, but just to reply to one very obvious comment that you could at least give me enough credit to have thought of myself already, which I did, and which I'm now going to reply to: Yes, I probably should break it down into sub-topics and sub-categories. But I should doesn't mean I would. Because 'should' here refers to what the majority of population would tell me, but this 'should' is different from my 'should' which is my subjective preference (cause there is no absolute objective 'should' or correct way and just like all subjective value judgments it's inherently meaningless), that is the style in which this is written, letting myself loose and going off on tangents yet connecting it all towards the end.

I don't feel obliged to do it any other way, yet I would appreciate if you could read it till the end, cause if nothing else it'd be a small peek inside my messy brain and thought processes, and I'm sure you would only learn something from this, but of course there's no pressure, and in fact I request you to stop reading it the moment you think it's getting too dark or lot of info, cause I talk about my perception of reality, and even though it's not pessimistic and a lot of hope, yet it's not exactly unrealistic utopian rosy-coloured glasses and denial of everything bad that's current happening, and my thoughts are going to be just like that reality, not trying to lessen it's impact and using the right words with the intention to evoke the correct amount of emotional affect that is required, and fill the gap as I see it and how other people seem to perceive it, so it can be brough closer to truth.

Or wait, let's do this, I will separate it into two parts, no more and no less, though the main ideas and theme is going to stay always in the background of all my posts, directly or indirectly, but I'm going to keep the first post lighter (though still by no means light or easy to read, it's relative in comparison to the second part) and the second post have the darker part. I strongly recommend that you read both the parts in one go, because they were intended to be one single post, separated for no purpose other than the segregation of topics that are connected yet could be categorized into different posts, though there is still a lot of overlap and they are connected, which is why I say you read it in one go.

The second post would have the same title with just the symbol that represents a conventionally agreed upon digit that is consecutive and successive appended to the digit that this blog post has which is the symbol used to represent the first or starting of any series also conventionally the norm everyone has agreed to use, though it's hard to know how it works so well; the unreasonable effectiveness of mathematics. In other words, 2 (two).

But I would strongly suggest you read it all if you're someone who like me believes that ignorance is never bliss, more information is always better than less information, and is always open to learning about diverse perspectives and different worldviews (not getting into your views on infohazards and similar stuff, because I'm talking about personal preferences and beliefs.).

Just keep in mind that it might start off at first with a very pessimistic and dark tone, but then I’m going to propose a solution too. But before coming to the solution, you need to understand the problem, and I’m going to try my best to explain the problem, because- this might sound counterintuitive- but the problem is more important than the solution, because my solution might be wrong, and if it is wrong you could help me correct it and point out my mistakes, but the problem remains a problem, and the problem is what we’re trying to solve.

This is also my approach with problems both in startup project and research questions: (haven’t done many of them yet, but I’ve planned this in advance) you identify a problem you wish to solve, and then try to brainstorm possible solutions. You start working on it, developing prototypes or designing experiments to test your hypothesis.

And you accordingly modify your plan to make it better and more likely to work in the real world, and if required, ditch the solution altogether, but you never leave the problem, just keep searching for better solutions, which is why your problem must be well-defined, and that is the reason a large part of this post is going to be dedicated to exactly that.

In the startup world, that’s how it’s done, as I’ve been told by some founders of successful companies, but in research there is another approach that uses the methods you are proficient in or like applied to problems that could be solved by it, but I won’t discuss it in detail as it’s irrelevant to this discussion. I do realize the this was a very long preface, but it was required and such a post deserves such a preface, so without further ado here's the main content.

I can very clearly see now. The world is meaningless, I had always known those words, but now I can see it, it’s as real as the laptop in front of me, or the table that it’s kept on, in a sense even more real, more real than reality itself, because I’ve realized that there is probably no objective reality, everything is subjective arising out of our own brains and social groups, prevalent beliefs, norms and traditions, way of doing things.

It's a problem I’ve always felt and that I’ve only recently been able to articulate and put into words. This one is a bit denser that most of my other writings, and I so a bit lengthier and a lot of ideas woven into one coherent narrative, or at least I hope. I can see how it’s just my genes and early environment, things I never got to control, that determined how my brain works, which is the basis of all of my cognitive abilities and traits, everything I use to perceive the world and acquire and process information, my interests and my concept of self, it's all in there, and it’s being run by something mysterious in ways I’m not even aware.

I’m also astonished how everyone just seems to unquestioningly accept it, like seriously people, you are just being driven around by these impulsive desires and intuitive thoughts, like a dictator just setting your own preferences and inclinations, and they’re just okay with what the dictator has by random chance throwing darts set for them made them predisposed or inclined for them to like.

I hate how it’s easier for some to follow their inclinations and predispositions, and ‘succeed’ in society by acting in ways that are more aligned with what the majority approves of and rewards, even though they’re just being selfish and doing what they are inclined to do.

Is the person who derives the same levels of satisfaction doing art, as someone playing games, as someone creating products that also happen to help people, or even people who happen to feel that helping people is right, how are they any different?! That's just ability, it's going to seem much more important when I extend the exact same idea to morality, if it doesn't already.

Why are some people ostracized or looked down upon just for- this is important- having thoughts or desires in their system-1 visceral primitive intuitive thinking fast part of the brain, which they never get to control, and then the same society who never listens to them says they’re evil and deserve to suffer after they do something that makes them a serial killer or worse.

How fair is it that some people are born with certain genes and in an environment that not just messed up their thought processes and behaviour, but pretty much guarantees that the society is going to make them suffer even more without trying to have any empathy and trying to understand or fix them, at least listen to them? Some people have such traits but have a more supportive family, or connections, or privileged background and help from people in power and with influence, just by chance?

How fair is it that for some people it’s a piece of cake and the suffering is manageable and they at least have hope, while some people are left to fend for themselves and are pushed to the limits where they have no option except to either off themselves or also take other people with them, which just creates a negative feedback loop or vicious cycle where we become even more narrow-minded and unwilling to have empathy?

And until we are able to find the genes and environmental factors responsible for it, and resolve the nature v nurture debate which by the way we are nowhere close to doing- when are people going to see that they are just making life more difficult for some by not allowing them to live according to their inclinations, which is even if the deviants are courageous and open-minded enough to discover their true inclinations, which is like an ignorance is bliss scenario of infohazards but shouldn’t be because society must be accommodating for everyone and everyone deserves to be loved; when are people going to understand such a simple thing?

This must be the case at least in cases where the person is just minding their own business and has harmless desires and personal preferences that are not causing any trouble to others or posing any threat to the security or well-being of others, such as queer community, sexual preferences, neurodivergent behaviour, and lots of other things. It gets messier, I admit, when it’s someone like a young psychopathic Dahmer.

But I still believe we can help them, and it’s our responsibility and obligation to help them, not just because we are a society and we need to help everyone that’s part of it and prevent future suffering and harm that could be cause to others-

But also because- and this is important- people need to understand that just for random chance and blind luck they could have been born in a society in a place at a time with those exact traits- genes and environment- that made them just like the young Ted or Dahmer, and then they would have understood the importance of what it feels like and all the factors that influence their thoughts and desires and behaviour and how society is so cruel to them, not despite but as a result due to which they do stuff that later makes them the cruel ones in the eyes of the majority in society.

This is why I like Rawl’s veil of ignorance; it forces you to think if you’d be willing to be born anywhere in any place at any time in any part of the society with any genes and environments and hence traits, inclinations, desires, preferences, interests, abilities, and so you would never want to have any undesirable traits or disabilities or illness and you’d always choose the best for yourself.

And then you’d realize that most people do not have this choice and you are probably much more fortunate than others and so it’s your responsibility to help those who are suffering and with trats you would never have wanted yourself to have, and I’d even go as far as to extend this idea to Singer’s idea of EA and say that all the resources, including time, that you don’t spend on helping people is the time that makes you guilty for all the suffering that they are going through as a result of you not helping them and that could be prevented had you acted differently. Take a moment to let that sink in, and understand its implications.

Why is suffering so acceptable? Does not everyone see how you must live and let live, and that means allowing everyone to discover and live according to their inclinations, even if it means setting yourself free or going against the prevalent social norms and creating your own values and morals?

I’m not saying the killing people is right or wrong, that’s not the topic I’m concerned about here, I’m asking why people are so rigid in their thinking about such important topics that can make or destroy whole lives- have we not already learned our lessons from the holocaust or the tragic incident with Alan Turing or how mentally ill people were kept in the past?

Some people- be it good or evil- are able to break free and do what they want, and regardless of if they do something great and go on to start revolutions that led to how things are normally done today, or made some novel scientific discoveries or innovative inventions that greatly increased the quality of life of several people...

Or be it the evil people who were able to rise to power through being manipulative and deceptive and then go what they wanted, trying to wipe out whole races or people or sending bombs to industrialists who led to the current technological society.

Whatever they did, they followed their inclinations and predispositions, and should we not as a society try to have more empathy, and investigate the underlying genes and environments and identify such people so we can help them instead of imposing pointless subjective morals and trying to make them conform?

When will we learn that this doesn’t work, and is in fact counterproductive and that the deviants will deviate and the outliers will remain outliers and those who you seek to conform are just going to run towards the other extreme? When are we going to change our approach and let people do what they want to do?

If what you want to do happens to be what society approves of and rewards, great, congratulations, be happy and celebrate, I’m so happy for you on you winning the genetic lottery and being born in the right place at the right time, enjoy your life!

But what if you’re someone who no one is able to understand? I always read about these serial killers and people who seem to be so highly intelligent yet so irrational stuff, and it does seem like they have all been mentally ill, because I find it hard to believe that intelligent people- even if intelligence is not everything, as I’ll come to shortly- would do something so highly irrational and foolish and stupid.

I read how they almost always have had an abusive childhood, or an isolated childhood and not being able to fit in- this I can relate with and I usually get goosebumps such as when I saw the Dahmer series- and Dahmer is just one of several examples- and realized how eerily similar his childhood was to mind, it sent shivers down my spine and made me a bit uncomfortable.

I have written about this in more detail in my review of the Unabomber, and here I’m won’t go into detail but expand on a few points: I rarely watch movies or anything for that matter, but I have seen Joker, and it’s one of my favourite movies. I liked the way the character was portrayed, and no I’m not going off topic, this is as relevant to the present discussion as it could get, so please bear with me for a moment here.

I am one who realizes and strongly dislikes glamorizing mental illness and talking about the madness-genius creativity without strong scientific evidence- though there is such evidence- but I realize these are serious problems and people pretending to have it when they don’t and faking it makes it much harder for people who actually have it and suffer from it and I find it in a very bad taste and dislike people who think this is fun- in any sense, interpretation or meaning of that word.

But I realized why I like such characters, and recently I was able to articulate it and put it into words though I’m not sure if the words would be able to convey my point and get it across as clearly as I can see it in my own head.

To be continued in the second part.

Edit: not read Schopenhauer yet, but I know the basics, and I felt like writing a little about his philosophy just because I used his name for this post series. I am going to briefly touch upon points that I explain in greater detail in the second part of this post.

Schopenhauer believed that the world is fundamentally characterized by suffering and that our desires and cravings only serve to amplify this suffering. He argued that human beings are ultimately controlled by their desires, and that true happiness can only be achieved by minimizing one's desires and accepting the limitations and struggles of life.

It's just like what I say in the post about all humans being driven by their subconscious desires and inclinations which have at least in large part been determined by factors like genes and early environment that are out of their control, but I'm more optimistic than him. I talk about a lot of pessimistic stuff too.

But I believe that it can be changed, looking at the current technological and scientific progress that must not be too predictable at the time of Schopenhauer, and without which my personal philosophy would also have been a lot more similar to his.

I do think that true happiness could be achieved by minimizing one's desires and setting your expectations low, and I have some good project ideas and research questions to investigate as well as interventions that I could develop to make this a reality for those who really are in such a hopeless situation, but I won't go as far as saying that it's the only way and that all humans are doomed to this fate, that sounds too pessimistic.

I believe that this philosophy of setting expectations low has some parallels with Stoic philosophy and could be helpful when applied in the right context and not being as pessimistic about it as Schopenhauer seems to suggest, and it's similar to how I believe being less neurotic and more calm, indifferent to events and mocking the absurdity of the universe, thinking more objectively and reigniting the lost sense of wonder at the mystery of everyday events we so frequently overlook, all could be made easier, but that's a topic for another post.

So apart from reducing your desires, I believe that we could adopt certain worldviews and techniques that could help us not just discover our true desires and inclinations, but also figure out a roadmap or develop a personal framework, a neat algorithm, using tools from decision science and the methods of logic and rationality, to maximize the probability of us achieving our desires and living a fulfilling life. This also is a post for another topic because I have some strategies in mind that I am using to discover my own true values and inclinations and it's working well.

I could leave it at that and it would already be a huge improvement, in my opinion, over Schopenhauer's way of thinking about the world and also the way things are currently done by everyone, as well as the prevalent mindset in society that seems to be widespread, not just pessimism but overly optimistic visions of unrealistic utopia that is a result of rosy-coloured glasses usually used to escape from the unfair and cruel real world, I was like that in the past so I might just be projecting my own worldview but I can't be the only one, right?

But now I know it is, not a utopia, not so soon, but a world that is still much better than most people seem to believe is possible, and I can see it clearly, I'm talking in abstractions and being vague intentionally not because I'm talking nonsense with no ground in reality or trying to invent a fictional world to myself escape from this reality, but because I'm writing about it,

and it's a bit too much so I need to organize it so it's not too incoherent even for me, as some helpful people have let me know that my posts are already a bit too lengthy and dense, and it's also not the sort of idea I am just expressing to document my own thought processes; this is important and I need everyone to understand these ideas because it involves real-world society and real people suffering.

So I'm not just going to leave it at that, and go one step ahead that is not so selfish to just stop at a stage where you have discovered your own values and inclinations and live a fulfilling life, you could do that and it might even be in your best interests to do so if you're inclined that way, but you must remember that there are people less fortunate than you and you could have been in their position just for blind luck or random chance,

as I explain in the second part, even assuming a perfectly deterministic universe to demonstrate how my point holds true even in an extreme fringe case, you still never knew which part of the world, society, time period, genes, environment you'd be born into, and I'll stop this point here, and encourage you to read the second part and Rawl's Veil of Ignorance experiment to get an intuitive understanding of the concept.

My point is that you must help others who are suffering and we must create a society that is conducive to every individual's flourishing and enable everyone to self-actualize, not necessarily no suffering or an easy path, but suffering only if it's optimal, and so, as Schopenhauer puts it, not only should not any human be unable to fulfil their desires and suppress them

(I think that it's impossible to go on living while doing what Schopenhauer suggests and adopting such a mindset, if you do it's a strong indicator that you're suicidal and need help, though I have some ideas through which you could tweak factors like the genes, environment and neural processes that make it easier for you to maintain realistic expectations and be satisfied with your current situations and condition, though even if I create such a system successfully, it ought to be used only as a last resort, and people give up too easily which is why this point is worth emphasizing;

if people are satisfied with their current situation nothing would ever change and improve, no one would try to learn and grow as a human, that would be disastrous and a fate- in certain instances- much worse than death, but maybe I'm biased against it-

because I myself can't imagine a day when I stop learning and growing unless it's the day I die, as self-improvement and lifelong learning are highly prized by me, so it might simply be inconceivable by me and in reality much more desirable state to be in than my brain leads me to believe, because just because I'm unable to imagine or understand something doesn't mean the event isn't possible or doesn't exist in real world, of course it does, and it tells me more about the cognitive constraints and limitations of my biological brain than anything about objective reality, if that even exists, because there is scientific evidence that it's subjective too just like most things we think as objective, but let's not go even more off-tangent into metaphysics now. I talk about this in my post 'objective is subjective'.

So, I was saying that an improved and updated idea of mine that builds upon the ideas of Schopenhauer might be realistic and helpful to some people, but undesirable to the majority, especially those who are too pessimistic or depressed and hence have a distorted view of reality and what's possible and what's not, so my current focus would be on helping everyone get better and live according to their true inclinations and values so they can lead a fulfilling life without excessive unnecessary suffering, and use ideas that might resemble Schopenhauer's but are much more helpful and optimistic-

such as setting realistic goals and expectations, using interventions and techniques to be more calm and less neurotic, focusing on processes instead of goals and setting goals according to processes but still having an overarching meaning just like Frankl's Logotherapy, studies in social psychology on how intrinsic motivation isn't enough, and Antifragility, and it's similarities with Stoic philosophy's focusing on what's under your control.

Don't worry if none of it makes any sense right now, it isn't meant to, and I'm just mentioning this so you know I'm not talking vague abstract nonsense and I have some concrete ideas in mind that I shall discuss in the near future after organizing them in a coherent form and structure, and I'm going to do so very soon, because it's not about me, it's about everyone who lives and suffers in a way that makes their life worse than death, the people I wish to help.)

Before ending this post, something else from reading an overview of Schopenhauer's philosophy: (just realized I've not even read him and I'm already building on his ideas and that's so stupid so I'll try my best to fit in some original works into my busy schedule cause it also seems interesting now that I already have an antidote to his pessimism, and others who might fall for his pessimistic ideas not knowing what's possible;

not guessing here, people who suffer from disorders who I sometimes talk to because no one else does- I was just like that in the not too distant past- have actually told me that they didn't know about the promising and exciting research being done at the cutting-edge of neuroscience and psychology, and I always try to tell them that you can be realistic and be hopeful because these are exciting times to be alive, with all the scientific and technological progress, and you just need to hold on for a while and everything would be great,

and I don't like giving out false hopes and I consider myself a skeptic and critical thinker, often to the point that some people think I'm being pessimistic, so my it must be given appropriate weight when I say that! And despite my inferiority complex, I even assure them that I am confident in my own abilities to do so if it doesn't happen soon, so that's another small reason to be hopeful, because now I know I'm not insane and just different and most people actually might be irrational so I must take initiative, because no one else is, and as much as I'd like to find someone with similar ambitions and ideas, I can't, so I must do it myself, might find some similar people in the process that could speed up progress and the probability of bringing about the reality that I can now clearly envision and have daydreams about.)

Schopenhauer's emphasis on individual will led him to reject the idea of objective morality, instead believing that ethical behaviour is determined by the individual's recognition of the suffering of others and their ability to act with compassion and empathy.

That's it, now Schopenhauer is making more sense (that was a joke, I know I'm not in a position to critique or judge the ideas of someone whom everyone considers so knowledgeable and wise without even reading his works, everyone who knows me knows I highly value intellectual humility, so I just felt like clarifying it's just a joke, just in case anyone gets the wrong ideas.) but I'm so happy to read this, it's like that feelings- read my post 'Good artists borrow, great artists steal' but this time I'm not annoyed that someone already thought of what I had been thinking, but it's very powerful and motivating because here is this learned man who is saying just the thing I have been trying to explain using cognitive empathy and determinism and scientific evidence (part two of this post).

I am even more confident in my ideas now, and I don't understand now why everyone thinks he is being pessimistic, because I also believe that there is no objective morality, and that's great when you realize how people have this messed up and distorted ideas of morals from ideological and religious scriptures and outdated traditional texts that leads to them committing hate crimes and violence and fighting and bloodshed and it's all so sad to watch, I myself feel embarrassed and suicidal sometimes due to their actions and my inability to understand why they do all this and cause unnecessary suffering to their own fellow beings-

I explain why this is the case because I realized it's related to Asperger's and something called cognitive empathy, but in brief I talk about why we should quit all this traditional preconceived notions of morality and the harmful parts of what is considered 'ethical' because several things that people consider ethical I think are actually causing great harm and suffering, and they are unaware how by criticizing 'evil' people they are themselves playing a very large role in propagating and enabling suffering and in some ways acting even more 'evil' and 'unethically' than the people they hate and display so much contempt for.

In very brief, I believe that everyone deserves to be loved, and we have a duty to be compassionate towards every sentient being on the planet, no exceptions. Schopenhauer also tells us that instead of simply rejecting ethics for no good reason just because you think being a contrarian and going against society is cool- a misconception that I seem to encounter very frequently and one of the more stupid and irrational beliefs that I have come across in other people- you make the main anchor or guiding principles of your actions and behaviour going forward to help people and prevent suffering, which I also believe that all humane people in a civilized society who believe in kindness and compassion ought to do.

And it connects nicely with his idea that people are simply driven by their desires, because I've noticed that the cause of almost all irrational behaviour is that certain people are inclined in a way to have such irrational impulsive desires or visceral intuitive thoughts that compel them to behave irrationally, the system-1 is almost always the main culprit in such cases. (thinking fast and slow reference, which is one of my posts based on a classic book with the same title written by Nobel Laureate Daniel Kahneman and that I recommend to everyone with the slightest interest in psychology, rationality and simply making better decisions in life.)

If you reject ethics, you'll be able to clearly judge all beliefs and thoughts and clearly distinguish between those that cause suffering to others or yourself, suffering that is unnecessary and harmful, and beliefs and actions that help people.

On the other hand, if you go by the code of ethics and believe whatever the society you happen to be born in and the time you happen to be born in believes, you might just consider it ethical to burn women for being witches, kill and torture humans for being homosexual, or kill every member of another religious group or race or case or any out-group just because your holy religious scriptures or your cult leader tells you that's what 'god' wants.

You could instead use this heuristic to make better decisions and evaluate actions and beliefs on the basis of suffering, and it doesn't just end here, this is just the start, because after reading the next part you'd realize that it's your duty and obligation to help those who happen to be born in a condition less fortunate than yours, because you could be just like them just for random chance, and all your actions must play a part inf reducing the suffering of others, keeping the distractions to a bare minimum required for optimal levels of productivity.

So, as Schopenhauer correctly pointed out, it's people's genes or environment or disposition or social peer group or society- things they don't directly control- that make them act irrationally that harms them or others, and many people happen to be in such unfortunately circumstances. But unlike Schopenhauer, I believe we can improve, help such people, minimize suffering or even completely eradicate unnecessary suffering, and create a better, safer, compassionate society, a more humane and accommodating society.

As you read this post and the next one, you also might notice that the methods I suggest to achieve such an ambitious goal don't even involve playing with most of these factors such as genes and early environment, though they play a large role in such 'desires' that Schopenhauer mentions; I suggest some simple ways of thinking about the world that would in itself be very powerful and help prevent a lot of suffering and make people realize that their idea of compassion and kindness is very misdirected and distorted, that they don't display love and kindness towards people who need it the most, and thus come off as hypocritical to an external observer who might be judging them on a purely logical basis without being influenced by human norms and social constructs, and this they do due to being conditioned by society and not questioning their beliefs, which is understandable, but it can't go on for much longer for obvious reasons.

This thing literally keeps me awake all day and a small part of the night (I like nights more than the day and dislike days and sunlight so my sleep cycle is a bit unconventional, hence day instead of night, not that it matters.), so unlike some of my earlier posts where I honestly didn't care if others read about my ideas, which happened to be just my different worldview, quirks and eccentricities, fun personal experiences, unconventional or unpopular opinions that just involved subjective value judgments and personal preferences, this series of posts, and some of my more recent posts focus on ideas that I want everyone to read and debate and discuss with me, because it involves beliefs and actions that result in suffering for real-world sentient beings, and I try to indicate in the starting of every post my goals and a short summary of what I'm going to talk about.

I'll end this post here, and please check out the second part for a more detailed and rigorous treatment of the topics I mentioned above. I'll just leave a quote that deeply resonates with me and my ideas, and concerns my ambitious project to investigate all the external factors that influence our lives, and I won't elaborate on the quote else this already lengthy post will turn into a thick book, but feel free to reach out if you wish to discuss it:

"You never even realize that the credentials are just a social construct and a useless piece of paper and how ridiculous it is to think that it could be something that could determine your worth or ability as a human, a simple piece of paper with some numbers, a complex human with a brain as different and unique, with all your abilities and interests- even if they have been stifled and you've been conditioned to not express them- and some people have told me in the past that some humans are simply not that able or interested in stuff, they can't achieve great things.

And I have thought about this a lot. I have also thought about self-actualization and finally come up with a very interesting framework to discover our true inclinations and values, and it seems to work; I'll create a post about it soon. But the point that's relevant here is that everyone has potential; not necessarily to be ambitious, because there are people who like living peaceful lives with little complexity and change, don't like exerting themselves too much, and that's perfectly fine.

But here's the important thing: you don't get to choose. You are already predisposed in a way that you can only find out through exploration and experimentation, trying stuff out and seeing how you like it, and putting yourself in different situations and having novel experiences so you can get closer to discovering your true values, interests, desires, and beliefs, and get closer to living a life that you find fulfilling and don't regret when the time comes for it to end.

You can act as you wish, but you can't really control what you wish or desire, and you can only get free of influence and social conditioning and norms that are preventing you from living the sort of life that you want to. For a more detailed analysis of this idea, I'll release a new post soon, but in the meanwhile, do check out my series of posts titled 'Schopenhauer'; it's very closely related.

"Man can do what he wants, but man can't want what he wants." -Schopenhauer

Edit 2: Before coming to the main topic for this edit, just an interesting little story that gave me the little extra encouragement to talk about my ideas and this project to fix people who are deemed unfixable by many researchers. One such researcher is Dr. Martha Stout who has this very interesting book on psychopaths called 'the sociopath next door' and in it she explains a lot of fascinating stuff anyone interested in abnormal psychology and psychopathology should try. But in it somewhere she gives the advice that we should not try to fix them because they are born evil and can't be helped, and there I respectfully disagree. No, wait, that doesn't sound right.

I took that personally, and my brain was like 'challenge accepted'. That's better. So I might contact her sometime in the near future as I've been trying to critique and comment on the works of several contemporary researchers working on fields I'm interested in, which I'd strongly encourage readers who are motivated about any topic and somewhat know what they wish to do in the future, and of course know at least enough about their research interests to hold a decent convo with accomplished and exceptionally smart researchers; and able to if not critique then at least understand them and ask decent questions, which I was doubtful I could do but realized that I not just understand but am able to glean some interesting insights from them and such convos always end in me learning something new and very interesting and them commending my motivation and passion for the topics we discussed, which has made me somewhat confident in my abilities, helpful to counteract my self-doubt.

I have come across the saying that says something like hard work succeeds when talent doesn't work hard- and I agree but talent plus hard work is always going to outcompete just hard work and no talent and there is always going to be someone more talented than you in terms of genes, environment or connections, and then you realize that even hard work is determined by your genes and upbringing, your inclinations~ and then bring in ideas such as what Taleb describes in 'fooled by randomness' and you realize how much random it is- almost as if it's all just determinism and randomness- which is why intellectual epistemic humility is important, and no one is self made success, no one deserves praise but more importantly no one deserves hate or that not worked hard enough and so they deserve their condition.

Actually a study that shows how talented people for whom hard work success look down upon others who failed but who might be just as or even more talented, which is why we must try to help the less fortunate, and which is also why simply working hard is not enough, you need to have the right talent traits connections to succeed in todays world and that's unfair to less fortunate people from underprivileged background; at least no one must suffer due to this or be unable to achieve their dreams, desires or ambitions.

So here's the idea demonstrated by a nice example I came up with from somewhere completely unexpected, which is why I am trying to be more mindful and observant of my surroundings and consciously take in sensory information and document all my experiences in order to glean new insights and question anything and everything. At a department in a hospital, I read a funny word before "facial surgery" that sounded like something that people would get to look more attractive, and that reminded me of how plastic surgeons make bank and how they are incentivized to spread unrealistic beauty standards.

Plastic surgeons take advantage of social conventional unrealistic harmful beauty standards and tell people you should be allowed to choose what u wanna look like feel good about yourself, but that's very wrong because even though its true that system 1 is socially conditioned to feel positive emotional affect when attractive faces, we can change that and its harmful to continue this cause there would be poor underprivileged people who wont be able to choose how they look and we need to minimize the influence of external factors that make it more difficult for people to self actualize live fulfilling life, and only those who have the money means to change their faces would be able to do so, and even though i believe that in most cases u should do what u like and what makes you happy and it also makes sense that better appearance makes you more likely to be successful in life, but you need to take into account the consequences of your actions too, the adverse effects on society in a future where many people poor would not be able to feel good about themselves and the suffering you would play a role in.

Plastic surgeons take advantage of social conventional unrealistic harmful beauty standards and tell ppl you should be allowed to choose what u wanna look like feel good about yourself, but that’s very wrong because even though its true that system 1 is socially conditioned to feel positive emotional affect when attractive faces, we can change that and its harmful to continue this cause there would be poor underprivileged ppl who wont be able to choose how they look and we need to minimize the influence of external factors that make it more difficult for ppl to self actualize live fulfilling life, and only those who have the money means to change their faces would be able to do so.

And even though I believe that in most cases u should do what u like and what makes you happy and it also makes sense that better appearance makes you more likely to be successful in life, but you need to take into account the consequences of your actions too, the adverse effects on society in a future where many ppl poor would not be able to feel good about themselves and the suffering you would play a role in;

This is similar to height increasing shoes cause studies find tall people are more likeable, perceived as more deserving of positions related to authority and power etc. as well as nepotism and connections, very similar to the genetic lottery but for the environment side where you are born in a family and environment where u have connections that others don’t that gives you an unfair advantage over others just due to random chance blind luck which is unfair to those less fortunate than you; in such cases due to reasons listed above, even though if you have a strong sense of morality and values that incline you to be mindful of well-being of others in society and especially the less fortunate and underprivileged as well as future consequences on the next generation whose potential suffering you'd be responsible for, it's more grey and fuzzy cause you could believe in some of those philosophies like- explain how you might not be obligated to non existent life forms and so feel no moral responsibility or negative emotions associated with any suffering that may or may not take place in the future, and you would also be correct (?) in thinking that things like ethics and morality and values have no absolute basis in objective reality and are just social and neuroscientific constructs propagated because you were socially conditioned to blindly accept them as facts and the way it works when you are too young to question them, for those in power to maintain their status quo and enjoy all the privileges while the poor suffer.

And hence you might conclude that it is after all in your best selfish interests to get that plastic surgery or height increasing shoes or leverage those high profile connections and family friends in position of wealth and power because after all that's how the people who are powerful now have acted in the past and now enjoying all the privileges and high quality of living-- irrespective of the fact that by doing so you're being part of the flawed system and helping perpetuate this flawed system set into motion by less compassionate beings at a time when moral standards were different and moment were burned for being witches and queers tortured for being homosexuals and lots of other stuff; and hence being in part responsible for not just being part of all the past suffering of those who have suffered, but also those who are going to suffer due to your actions, which might have larger effects than you might think due to the butterfly effect.

But if as I earlier indicated don't think you are obligated to help the less fortunate, and that you are not inclined in a way to have values consistent with behaviour that could help others or compel you to reduce suffering, you'd be perfectly logical and rational doing what you're doing, and the only thing that would matter is you taking into account the consequences and accepting your responsibility or somehow justifying it rationalizing it away, and so taking a well-informed decision and calculated risk as opposed to foolish uncalculated risk, and no one could tell you are wrong, if you yourself decide you don't want to help others, even though I have good reasons to think that you should change your beliefs in such a case, reasons I've described in other posts, reasons involving Rawl's Veil of Ignorance, Jung's Shadow Theory, Influence of external factors in determining inclinations and causing suffering, and much more, but that's not in the scope of this post.

Though I might again just be rationalizing based on my desires as I'm inclined in a way to have core values that compel me to eradicate all suffering, have empathy for all beings who are less fortunate than me and who suffer, and because I believe that I have a moral responsibility and obligation towards helping such sentient beings who suffer because I believe everyone deserves to be understood and loved and no one deserves to suffer, but you might have a different worldview than mine, and I would understand that, though if you happen to be open to debate, please get in touch and we could have a discussion in which both of us could learn from each other, if you have any comments really. I do realize very well that if I had genes and the sort of upbringing in a certain kind of environment that inclined me to be hateful and not care or even derive pleasure from the suffering of others, I might have expressed different views, but the way things are, it happens to be the case that I am inclined to believe that no one deserves to suffer and it's the responsibility of everyone to help those who are unfortunate enough to suffer, or at least to not spread any more suffering, though I do have a strong belief in the former version and have good logical reasons as well as empirical evidence to back my beliefs, as always being open to changing my mind if anyone is able to present me with convincing counter arguments or counter evidence.

But as I have such beliefs right now and even though I usually don't endorse them or impose my worldview onto others, this is one of the very few exceptions as it happens to involve sentient beings suffering, and I can't sleep peacefully at night knowing that there are being suffering while majority of people are brainwashed and conditioned to accept it as the way of life and how things are done with nothing under their control- a misconception that's causing great suffering and I'm guessing has been propagated by some of those in positions of wealth and power and happen to have no internal moral compass or conscience, just the desire to rule and enjoy their privileges even if it's at the cost of others suffering.

And unluckily for you, I won't let you sleep too, and would try my best to defend my belief that suffering is wrong and everyone deserves love and compassion-- unless you have good arguments to convince me otherwise, or do not believe in kindness, compassion, empathy and love, and would be fine undergoing such painful experiences with strong negative emotional affect yourself without resistance, in which case I'd concede that your position is, in my opinion, justified and that you can avoid being a part of my project to eradicate all unnecessary excessive suffering.

An other third alternative or way out for you that just occurred to me but that's highly improbable is if you prove that all suffering, no matter what amount or intensity of negative subjective mental experience, is conducive to growth and flourishing, and in some way has potential beneficial effects or expected utility or future upsides that- with a probability commensurate with or rough to make up for the amount of suffering a being is required to undergo- could outweigh, counter or cancel the negative experiences and provide a level of fulfilment or happiness that would make it worth the suffering.

I seriously cant see how that could be possible and how I- or rather my brain- was even able to conceive of such an idea in the first place, but I'd be more than happy to change my mind and also myself be able to sleep peacefully at night if you are able to prove any of the three things above and be kind (!) enough to let me know and make me understand, convince me and make me change my mind. Until then, I stand by my beliefs and it's high time I start talking about it openly because I've had enough of irrational beliefs and behaviour causing needless preventable unnecessary harm and excessive suffering that in no way seems the optimal amounts necessary for flourishing. Keep language mistakes maybe and punctuation errors so ppl don’t suspect you are ai or chat gpt.

Exception to my belief that you should not change appearance artificially: if you have been through some serious incident such as an automobile accident or war and have a severely deformed face then it's justified because that's indicative of suffering and it's exceedingly rare and also hurts so it might be better depending on the individual cases.

Extract lessons from every personal experience and have novel experiences, put yourself in different situations, talk to different and similar minded people about your ideas and their ideas so you have more ideas and more personal experiences, get closer to your values and interests, discover your true inclinations, immerse yourself in different cultures and befriend humans from diverse backgrounds, have lots of experiences so you can connect your personal experiences with your acquired knowledge and information, values, research questions, ideas, projects, beliefs, suffering and everything that makes you unique and that you could leverage to develop a niche and talk about share publicly and also in future college applications even though prestige is just an illusion~

This is similar to height increasing shoes cause studies find tall people are more likeable, perceived as more deserving of positions related to authority and power etc. as well as nepotism and connections, the environment lottery is very similar to the genetic lottery, but instead of genes, it's about the environment you're born into. You may be born into a family or environment with connections that others don't have, giving you an unfair advantage due to blind luck. This is unfair to those who are less fortunate. In such cases, even if you have a strong sense of morality and values that incline you to be mindful of the well-being of others in society, especially the less fortunate and underprivileged, as well as the potential suffering of future generations, it's a grey and fuzzy area. You could believe in certain philosophies, such as those mentioned in NP (not provided), which argue that you are not obligated to non-existent life forms, and therefore feel no sense of remorse for any suffering that may or may not occur in the future. In this case, you would also be correct. in thinking that things like ethics and morality and values have no absolute basis in objective reality and are just social and neuroscientific constructs propagated because you were socially conditioned to blindly accept them as facts and the way it works when you were too young to question them, for those in power to maintain their status quo and enjoy all the privileges while the poor suffer.

And hence you might conclude that it is after all in your best selfish interests to get that plastic surgery or elevator shoes or makeup or leverage those high profile connections and family friends in position of wealth and power because after all that's how the people who are powerful now have acted in the past and now enjoying all the privileges and high quality of living-- irrespective of the fact that by doing so you're being part of the flawed system and helping perpetuate this flawed system set into motion by less compassionate beings at a time when moral standards were different and women were burned for being witches and queers tortured for being homosexuals and lots of other stuff; and hence being in part responsible for not just being part of all the past suffering of those who have suffered, but also those who are going to suffer due to your actions, which might have larger effects than you might think due to the butterfly effect.

But if as I earlier indicated don't think you are obligated to help the less fortunate, and that you are not inclined in a way to have values consistent with behaviour that could help others or compel you to reduce suffering, you'd be perfectly logical and rational doing what you're doing, and the only thing that would matter is you taking into account the consequences and accepting your responsibility or somehow justifying it rationalizing it away, and so taking a well-informed decision and calculated risk as opposed to foolish uncalculated risk, and no one could tell you you are wrong, if you yourself decide you don't want to help others, even though I have good reasons to think that you should change your beliefs in such a case, reasons I've described in other posts, reasons involving Rawl's Veil of Ignorance, Jung's Shadow Theory, Influence of external factors in determining inclinations and causing suffering, and much more, but that's not in the scope of this post.

Though I might again just be rationalizing based on my desires as I'm inclined in a way to have core values that compel me to eradicate all suffering, have empathy for all beings who are less fortunate than me and who suffer, and because I believe that I have a moral responsibility and obligation towards helping such sentient beings who suffer because I believe everyone deserves to be understood and loved and no one deserves to suffer, but you might have a different worldview than mine, and I would understand that, though if you happen to be open to debate, please get in touch and we could have a discussion in which both of us could learn from each other, if you have any comments really. I do realize very well that if I had genes and the sort of upbringing in a certain kind of environment that inclined me to be hateful and not care or even derive pleasure from the suffering of others, I might have expressed different views, but the way things are, it happens to be the case that I am inclined to believe that no one deserves to suffer and it's the responsibility of everyone to help those who are unfortunate enough to suffer, or at least to not spread any more suffering, though I do have a strong belief in the former version and have good logical reasons as well as empirical evidence to back my beliefs, as always being open to changing my mind if anyone is able to present me with convincing counter arguments or counter evidence.

But as I have such beliefs right now and even though I usually don't endorse them or impose my worldview onto others, this is one of the very few exceptions as it happens to involve sentient beings suffering, and I can't sleep peacefully at night knowing that there are being suffering while majority of people are brainwashed and conditioned to accept it as the way of life and how things are done with nothing under their control- a misconception that's causing great suffering and I'm guessing has been propagated by some of those in positions of wealth and power and happen to have no internal moral compass or conscience, just the desire to rule and enjoy their privileges even if it's at the cost of others suffering. And unluckily for you, I won't let you sleep too, and would try my best to defend my belief that suffering is wrong and everyone deserves love and compassion--

unless you have good arguments to convince me otherwise, or do not believe in kindness, compassion, empathy and love, and would be fine undergoing such painful experiences with strong negative emotional affect yourself without resistance, in which case I'd concede that your position is, in my opinion, justified and that you can avoid being a part of my project to eradicate all unnecessary excessive suffering.

An other third alternative or way out for you that just occurred to me but that's highly improbable is if you prove that all suffering, no matter what amount or intensity of negative subjective mental experience, is conducive to growth and flourishing, and in some way has potential beneficial effects or expected utility or future upsides that- with a probability commensurate with or enough to make up for the amount of suffering a being is required to undergo- could outweigh, counter or cancel the negative experiences and provide a level of fulfilment or happiness that would make it worth the suffering.

I seriously can't see how that could be possible and how I- or rather my brain- was even able to conceive of such an idea in the first place, but I'd be more than happy to change my mind and also myself be able to sleep peacefully at night if you are able to prove any of the three things above and be kind (!) enough to let me know and make me understand, convince me and make me change my mind. Until then, I stand by my beliefs and it's high time I start talking about it openly because I've had enough of irrational beliefs and behaviour causing needless preventable unnecessary harm and excessive suffering that in no way seems the optimal amounts necessary for flourishing.

Exception to my belief that you should not change appearance artificially: if you have been through some serious incident such as an automobile accident or war and have a severely deformed face then it's justified because that's indicative of suffering and it's exceedingly rare and also hurts so it might be better depending on the individual class.

After thinking a bit more deeply about this, I think forming connections between people who work in domains that I don't wish to work in but my other connections might benefit from and hence benefit in some way or another from being introduced and connected with each other, with the expectation that they would return the favour by themselves helping their connections including me, by connecting everyone with anyone who they might benefit from in terms of career, research, industry, startup, whatever.

I have realized that even if I have good credentials, research publications, great ideas, everything but the right connections, some suckers who happen to be born in the right privileged family in positions of power who have the right connections would always get whatever they desire while doing the minimum even if they are dumb as rock, while I'd always be at a relative disadvantage in comparison to them; so I realized that I have the right ideas, ability and skills, so why not add social skills and connections, form new acquaintances, not just for my selfish needs but as a larger overarching goal to connect two people who might find each other helpful or be like-minded, because I enjoy meeting and learning about new people anyway, and so if I could form the right connections between people, and myself find the right people who work in areas I wish to work in in the near future, it would not just be beneficial for the whole network, where the whole network of my connections benefits by my desire to connect two people and in turn myself get connected to relevant like-minded people, but also play a much larger societal role in reducing the role of power and connections that people in privilege take unfair advantage of, because if everyone of us could help each other and eventually the network is so large that no one is at a relative disadvantage, then no one would have any unfair advantage just due to chance or accident of birth and we could create a more egalitarian society where at the end everyone is judge more closer by merit and at least connections and power doesn't play as significant role as it does today, a society such as envisioned in Rawl's Veil of Ignorance. I admit there might be some rationalization based on subconscious preferences and desires hidden in there, but my belief remains.