Primordial Groove

I've pondered this question and would like some input.

What would need to happen internally for me to be a person that doesn't give a shit about anyone other than me and my family? What would it take to be ruthless in business thus becoming wealthy, affording me the power to back my new found conviction?

Im just curious because I can't seem to break past 'barriers' in my rationale. It feels 'uncomfortable' to think of life in those tems but I don't know why. Any insight?

For the record, I think an individualist mentality will in the future be the destruction of human civilization. Without common goals in humanity, I see us doomed by some cocksucker with a chip on his shoulder or a god commanding him.

fcuk

I'm a bit confused. If you think this "individualist mentality" is so negative, then why would you want to model yourself in that way?

[ November 06, 2002: Message edited by: pomegranate ]</p>

Psycho Economist

Yeah, your mama raised you to care about others. Some people were taught to win at all cost when they were little. 'Nuff said.

If you went through the motions of being an individualist, surely enough, your communitarian values will crack like an eggshell (assuming you don't give up the charade first). It won't be fun for several years, as you struggle to internalize a foreign value system: you'll fight it with every neuron in your prefrontal cortex. But eventually you'll beat those brain cells submission and you'll only feel the occasional twinge of pitty for those you subjugate, and that will be easily drowned by a shot of expensive hard liquor.

The same could be said for an individualist turning into a communitarian, except substituting cheap booze for expensive stuff.

(I can't tell where I'm being serious and where I have my tongue in my cheek, either )

galiel

You would need to abandon all reason.

As a member of society, which implies a voluntary relinquishment of certain individual freedoms in order to reap the benefits of cooperative life, it would be illogical and counterproductive for you to act utterly selfishly. The fact that "pure" self-interest is currently (and quite recently became) the dominant cultural message in the U.S. does not make it any more rational or constructive.

Primordial Groove

Recently, on a website discussiong the 'attributes' of a vast majority of wealthy individuals worldwide (cant produce link atm) the subject of mentality was presented.
It stated that most wealthy people do not have a herd mentality. The example used was public schools. It stated that from grade K, people are taught to conform to the herd. How we are taught not to question authority or step outside specific guidelines as directed. This, the story implies, leads to setting up walls around us which keep us from reaching our full potential. Does this have any merit?
Also, it discusses that most people have a right/wrong-good/bad frame of mind. Instead of this perspective, we should lookat the world not as right or wrong but merely consequences.

What do you think? Are we sheep as perceived by the wealthy, subjects to their ways? OR, are we truley our own self? Do we set the rules or are they set for use unbeknownst?

Psycho Economist

Sounds like someone tried to sucker you into objectivism or scientology. Any good *baaa* cult likes to *baaa* say that its members are the only true *baaa* individuals.

excreationist

Well they'd try to manipulate us like sheep using advertising campaigns that would be based on a lot of psychological research... politicians also do this... Marketing skills can be quite effective, but they're not fool-proof - people often would turn them down, but if they're good enough, they'd come out in front with a profit.

Well governments that are elected by the people are supposed to keep the self-centered capitalists under control - e.g. enforce safety standards, etc. Though in the U.S. I think the major political parties get their advertising funding from big corporations and this would probably be dependent on the parties giving corporations in general something in return - I mean I doubt parties would donate millions of dollars to senators and campaigns with no strings attached.

Jagged

I think humans have evolved to care about each other, and it's a "healthy" thing for us as individuals, but sometimes something goes "wrong." I would tend toward suspicion of a deficiency in childhood. "What would need to happen to make me this way," would more likely be "what would've needed to happen in the past for me to become this way."

Stay with me now... These traits are often found in people with Avoidant Personality Disorder, thought to be rooted in childhood. Commonly those with this disorder are called "sociopaths." There seems to be a correlation to a lack of a male influence early in life. The majority of the prison population is thought to be diagnosably AP (remember your comment about the death of civilization). You can read about it on a myriad of sites like <a href="http://www.apa.org." target="_blank">www.apa.org.</a>

I do NOT think this has anything to do with a lack of "herd" mentality. Thinking for yourself has nothing to do with caring only for yourself.

However. I do think people with Avoidant Personality and other Personality Disordered tendencies are overrepresented in the "traditional" business world in the US (ie corporate America vs entrepreneurial businesses). It's the "I'll do anything to get ahead even if it means destroying you" mentality. Ultimately I don't think these people often make it to the very top, but they make a lot of people's lives hell as lower managers, etc. And they may in general shove their way into high-paying positions because they are seen as "tough on" their employees.

I think it's a fallacy to believe that the ONLY way to succeed in business is by stepping on others' toes. I think small businesses and entrepreneurs (ahem) are gradually changing this perception by successfully balancing an interest in money as well as personal ethics.

One of my pet theories.

[ November 06, 2002: Message edited by: Jagged Little Pill ]</p>

The Other Michael

That reminds me of a Bizzaro (by Piraro) cartoon that one of my coworkers has on his partition.

You see a suited guy with a very BIG tie that is being inspected by another suit. The tie is inscribed "I'll grind you into the dirt you worm" or some sentiment like that. The fellow looking at the tie is remarking "Now THAT is a power tie!".

There do seem to be at least one or two people in the business world who are looking out for number one, and no one else.

cheers,
Michael

ManM

galiel,
You have forgotten about enlightened self-interest. A person can act in the interests of others out of selfishness. That doesn't mean he has to care about those he supports to further his own interests. I think what Primordial Groove is asking deals more with stomping on people when you know there will be no harm done to you. Guilt is the only thing that stands in his way. By the way, this is why I think self-interest makes a horrible foundation for morality.