Jump to content

Makaze

Member
  • Posts

    637
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Makaze

  1. Eventually. This is arrogant to say, but if you want to imagine a world of highly adaptable people, willing to question every facet of their world and themselves, imagine a world of people like me. I don't think that is enough to make the leap to greater intelligence, for one. It might mean a world where people aren't afraid to improve other traits, but it doesn't mean a world where it's physically easier to do so. Is it adapting for evolutionary reasons (survival)? Personal reasons (independence)? That's what I mean. What you said is good enough. It would be personal reasons according to that. Weaknesses in personal willpower. When people question themselves deeply, break out of convention, social forces, and habits, they tend to become more anarchic, more self-motivated. On a larger scale, evolution would happen regardless of intent. I think it could lead to a more ideal social structure. Is that your intent?
  2. You're right. This one might have the worst tradeoffs of any trait I've considered. Similar to curiosity in a way. The more adaptable we become, the more risks we will take. People are stubborn and preserve status quo for a reason: It's a safe survival strategy. In the absence of increased intelligence, empathy, or creativity, just being able to adapt does not mean our ability to solve problems becomes better. It is a good idea because it improves capacity for evolution, but it would be slower than most of the other options. We might make terrible mistakes because we can. But I'm not sure this traits is well-defined.
  3. The tradeoff would have to be privacy. Curiosity makes people pry into others' lives. With extreme curiosity comes extreme ethics violations. It might get to a point where everyone is a super sleuth and no one has a private life. How bad that is depends on the person, but it would be devastating for many.
  4. I believe you made an ironic miscalculation in assuming that trading off empathy leads to common understanding. There is no rule saying that because logic is the same for everyone, it will be used to achieve the same goals. For two people with vastly different goals, both will have perfectly rational paths that nonetheless lead to direct contradiction and conflict, sometimes even requiring the death of one of the parties to appease the other. Understanding the logic used to reach a goal does not mean the same thing as understanding why they wanted the goal in the first place. That is a gap we could never bridge without empathy.
  5. How would you define it?
  6. this man has the right priorities
  7. she was 16 and I thought it was a guy when I first saw her worst luck
  8. >go to skating rink >see girl dressed up as Sakura from Naruto >she sees you looking and comes up to you >finds out you know who Sakura is >asks how old you are >"19" >"GODDAMMIT" >she clings to you for rest of the night anyway this is the story of how I stopped going to skating rinks
  9. Thread in this section. I started all that.
  10. How far my interviews have come. How little I know everyone who gets one.
  11. If you could vastly improve one, and only one, specific trait in humanity (e.g. intelligence, imagination, trust, empathy, etc) what trait would you pick? What trade offs would you expect compared to other choices?
  12. A lot good happened in my personal life. A lot bad happened in the world.
  13. Makaze's deal: If you help me with your power role even once, I will not shoot you or have you shot for the rest of the game, even if I have to idle in the endgame. (Skype is makaze64, Discord is Makaze#9709)
×
×
  • Create New...