Clearly these people are unfamiliar with the prisoner’s dilemma.
zeppo@lemmy.world 10 months ago
That’s the entire point of the phrase, as far as how I’ve always interpreted it: don’t blame people for doing what’s best for them within a system they don’t control.
Mango@lemmy.world 10 months ago
Jeknilah@monero.town 10 months ago
And what do you know about Nash Equilibriums?
Mango@lemmy.world 10 months ago
After reading the Wikipedia page, absolutely nothing. It doesn’t seem to be a thing that actually applies anywhere.
Jeknilah@monero.town 10 months ago
I don’t know what to say. It’s taught in a typical American economics class nowadays. www.youtube.com/watch?v=UkXI-zPcDIM
someguy3@lemmy.world 10 months ago
Legality is not the same as moral or ethical. The rules of life, civility, and good society are not preordained. Aka we make our own norms and values.
intensely_human@lemm.ee 10 months ago
No, we don’t make our own norms and values. There’s no reason to believe that is any more flexible than our reliance on iron or potassium to survive.
littlebluespark@lemmy.world 10 months ago
I’m sorry, but fucking what.
hglman@lemmy.ml 9 months ago
Have you any idea of the scope of existing human norms and values? Your statement is false based on the scope of people alive today.
novibe@lemmy.ml 10 months ago
But also, morality does fuck all to help you survive. Morality is absolutely useless for an individual, much to the contrary.
someguy3@lemmy.world 10 months ago
You heard it here lemmy, this guy things morality is “absolutely useless”.
novibe@lemmy.ml 9 months ago
Yup! Doing things because some moral authority decided it was “right” is dumb as fuck and I’ll die on that hill.
What a lack of material analysis does to a mfer and all etc. etc.
Prunebutt@slrpnk.net 9 months ago
Morality is the basis for social cohesion, which is necessary for the survival of the individual. Try to survive without the help of any other person, including parents, teachers, employees, …
novibe@lemmy.ml 9 months ago
That has nothing to do with morality. You don’t help people because it’s right. We help each other because we literally evolved to be social animals. Our biology in many ways depends on others. We feel individually sad and bad if we are isolated. And we feel good when we help others and see that people around us are doing well.
Morality has not been present throughout our evolutionary or even social history. Moralism only became an essential part of society after the Christianity and other religions like it took over.
Things being “wrong” or “right” doesn’t help us really, materially. In fact, it’s mostly been used to control people and keep them in-line. After all, who decides what’s “moral”?
Empricorn@feddit.nl 10 months ago
The system is large and powerful. However, it’s perpetuated by individuals. Apathy is a lack of empathy…
kjPhfeYsEkWyhoxaxjGgRfnj@lemmy.world 10 months ago
In this particular context regulatory capture is the unseen bullshit of the claim
themeatbridge@lemmy.world 10 months ago
I can hate both. Morality is not subject to the whims of legislation. If you’re a billionaire, you’ve done something immoral. Playing “within the rules” does not absolve you of all morality.
givesomefucks@lemmy.world 10 months ago
The reason that doesn’t make sense, is billionaires are the only ones with the power to fix the economic system thru political donations.
The saying isn’t meant for your example, because they’re not just players. Their also the refs and the ones who wrote the rules for the game.
Like:
That makes sense if said between prisoners about how shitty jail is. But if a prison guard beat an inmate and then said that, it doesn’t make sense.
Just because it’s not true 100% of the time for 100% of people doesn’t mean it’s worthless. By that logic no phrase should exist
zeppo@lemmy.world 10 months ago
I agree, I’ve said that about this phrase before! I can hate the player too. Not one of my favorite maxims.
intensely_human@lemm.ee 10 months ago
Legislation is not the only game being referred to by this saying.
themeatbridge@lemmy.world 9 months ago
No, but it was OP’s example. Use it in any ither context, and I’ll tell you why the player is also a shitty person, regardless of the game.
Is it a guy being emotionally manipulative to have relationships with multiple women? Yeah, he’s a shitbag.
Is it a business resorting to underhanded, but profitable, practices to corner the market and boost income? Shitbags.
Is it the kid cheesing that one move to win every battle? Shit. Bag.
I mean, there are degrees of being a shitty person. But anyone saying “don’t hate the player, hate the game,” knows they are doing something shitty and are doing it anyway because they can.
Prunebutt@slrpnk.net 10 months ago
If a game inevitably leads to billionaires unless you can count on all individuals being moral people, I take the liberty of hating the game that sets things up like that.
themeatbridge@lemmy.world 10 months ago
Any system can be abused. Amoral assholes will always exist. We have a system that rewards amoral assholes with wealth and power. Hate both the player and the game.
Prunebutt@slrpnk.net 9 months ago
Of course you can hate both. But I think the phrase tries to make you focus on systemic issues instead of individualising them.
I can hate Elon Musk. But if he wasn’t there, someone else would fill the dipshit shaped hole the system leaves for him.
intensely_human@lemm.ee 10 months ago
We have a system that rewards people for producing value. You can see the effects of this system all around you, in the absolutely massive wealth that surrounds and serves you every day.