tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6642011.post111482734971702820..comments2023-10-29T10:32:36.914-04:00Comments on Philosophy, et cetera: Talent, Effort and DesertRichard Y Chappellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16725218276285291235noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6642011.post-90775851022955622252009-03-20T06:13:00.000-04:002009-03-20T06:13:00.000-04:00I agree but if one suggests that rewards should be...I agree but if one suggests that rewards should be based on effort than there should be a way of measuring effort or a universal standard for calculating the amount of effort put in.<BR/><BR/>Its not in our power to be born with exceptional qualities which would save us from extra efforts. Also, if you believe in God then, you will also believe that if he grants more to someone then its for the best and general good. <BR/><BR/>Let us not forget that:<BR/>Inequality is the law of nature.Alihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06337483607892917155noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6642011.post-1114848769892150022005-04-30T04:12:00.000-04:002005-04-30T04:12:00.000-04:00ok hmm I guess the diference is that I, and seemin...ok hmm I guess the diference is that I, and seemingly you, deny the existance of "deserve". <BR/><BR/>that and we obviously dont want to allow mis-allocation of resources (like retarded children being put into rocket science) just because rocket sicence might be seen as desirable and thus reward.<BR/><BR/>I guess one of the problems (which is actualy a problem for socialism as a whole) is that most things that are rewards (notably money) are also basically "power" and jsut like with hte retarded child it is better for utilitarianism if the smartest people (and the most well meaning) have the largest amount of power because they are least likely to do stupid things wiht it thus creating a better net efect.Geniushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11624496692217466430noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6642011.post-1114845871659302272005-04-30T03:24:00.000-04:002005-04-30T03:24:00.000-04:00Oh, I agree - there are certainly instrumental rea...Oh, I agree - there are certainly instrumental reasons to encourage effort and achievement through incentives. But that's different from whether someone <I>deserves</I> a reward in a way which gives them a special claim to override considerations of utility.Richard Y Chappellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16725218276285291235noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6642011.post-1114845504044577222005-04-30T03:18:00.000-04:002005-04-30T03:18:00.000-04:00Encouraging effort could be sstem optimization.For...Encouraging effort could be sstem optimization.<BR/><BR/>For example lets say a smart person (like you or I) can produce 10 units of utility for society with no effort and 20 with effort<BR/>a not so smart person can produce 4 units without effort and 8 with it.<BR/><BR/>Utilitarianism says we should encourage us to produce 20 units and hte other guys to produce 8 if it is at all possible to do so.<BR/><BR/>If you reward people for producing <BR/>an arbitrary amount of utility your not likely to find a way for both to suceed but you could get both to try hard by encouraging that.<BR/><BR/>This doesnt mean trying hard is not genetic (it is) it just means it is somthing that one can optimize possibly unlike actual IQ. Thus we take a deterministic view where no one is responsible for anything and yet still reward hard work.<BR/><BR/>I'm not afraid to shoot us both in the foot here ;)Geniushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11624496692217466430noreply@blogger.com