So, it's all about me, me, me. I live in such a way that I have the largest influence possible in every conceivable way.
None of us wants to be treated like trash. We often talk about that simple biological urge with the word, dignity. Respect is a good word, too.
Some don't care about it, though.
Such people have experienced events that cost them their dignity. In order not to be deeply disappointed, they condition themselves that it does not interest them.
Deep down, they do care...
The me-me-me principle says that all of us are born with the desire to be treated decently by others.
Do you see that creepy looking guy at the table near the window? What if he comes here and offers a drink just like that?
... Anyone who accepts anything from him must be quite desperate in terms of attention, money, or both.
Ah, so isn't it more complicated? You're saying that his offer would offend you. His attempt to be nice would negatively affect your dignity.
We have different criteria for dignity. For example, some people cannot get themselves to cleaning toilet bowls, because they always had someone else to do it for them. For the rest of us, it has nothing to do with dignity. It's simply a matter of being responsible for your own living environment.
It makes a difference whether you do it for yourself, or for others and that for making a living.
Some tasks are unavoidable in any society. Public-toilet cleaning, garbage collecting, changing diapers of the elderly, to name a few. They need to be done by someone and we are collectively dependent on people who are in charge of them.
Other menial jobs, such as working on an assembly line and tending a convenience store, fit in that category as well.
Somebody's got to do what is considered menial, but everybody would rather do something else.
I'm sure some people prefer tending a store to lecturing computer science.
I agree, but consider the mix of financial rewards and social respect of the two jobs. Grosso modo, a professor scores higher than a store clerk.
What if the professor secretly generates and spreads computer viruses and the clerk is a jazz musician by night?
Oh, please, none of such exceptions! I want to keep our discussion simple.
I thought you wouldn't believe anything unless it's complicated.
Without denying that assessment in totality, let me say that...
You see? By the way, isn't the store clerk what he is because he slacked off in school? That is, by his own fault?
Shouldn't people who'd rather be professors be grateful because he is doing what they don't want to do?
Then, the clerk should be happy that the professors are doing what he doesn't want to do or can't do.
Think about an ideal society in which everyone studies hard and achieves the same level of education. Someone still has to clean public toilets. However, the respect for toilet cleaners would be lower than that for professors, as it always has been.
The cleaners' me-me-me desire would not be fulfilled... I think those with smaller me-me-me feelings become cleaners in any case.
Do you think they have absolutely zero of me-me-me?
That's possible.
I think not. They could be trained to be that way, but none of us is totally devoid of me-me-me.
What about the so-called saints?
As long as you are a living creature, me-me-me is in you. As if to make the point, offers for canonization are never declined.
That's because it happens after they're dead! What if we could train people to think that they are happy with cleaning jobs?
That's exactly what happens with class systems. Because people in power want others to do what they don't want to, they condition the lower class to think that they only deserve less desirable jobs.
I know that overt class-systems are out of fashion, but what is exactly wrong with them?
Their arbitrariness. If you happen to be born into an upper class family, you do not need to sacrifice your dignity, and if it is a low class family, you have to. You have no choice over it.
That happens even without class systems. If you are born into a rich family, you have better chances of getting better education and leading a more comfortable life. You have no choice whether to be born into a rich family or a poor one. The same with political connection.
Yes. The difference is that, with class systems, the entire society thinks that you are good for this, but not good enough for that. The labeling is rigid and has almost law-like status.
Forced changes in dignity criteria so that they fit the interests of the powerful...
Anyway, people who sacrifice their dignity for doing what needs to be done in the society should be rewarded for that.
I've read that you should observe during a dinner date how your date treats the servers, but it looks like you can substitute servers with garbage collectors.
In my opinion, that's the easy part. The difficult part is rewarding them financially. Undesirable, but necessary, jobs tend to be low skill, and hence, they command near minimum-wage. If we agree that it is impossible to have a normal life with such income, it means that they should be paid more.
What do you mean a normal life, here?
If you are healthy and work full-time in an honest job, you should be able to purchase a modest home, raise a family, give good education to the children, go on a vacation, and retire without serious monetary concerns. If you are sick, you should have access to affordable medical care and supplementary income; your children shouldn't starve simply because you fell ill.
That means relatively high prices of goods and/or taxes.
Just as I want to keep my dignity, I imagine others would want to do so as well. Cooperation is required to honor this fundamental desire for all, and that entails monetary adjustments.
Hmmm, I think you are particularly finicky about your dignity.
Ha, so much the better!
None of us wants to be treated like trash. We often talk about that simple biological urge with the word, dignity. Respect is a good word, too.
Some don't care about it, though.
Such people have experienced events that cost them their dignity. In order not to be deeply disappointed, they condition themselves that it does not interest them.
Deep down, they do care...
The me-me-me principle says that all of us are born with the desire to be treated decently by others.
Do you see that creepy looking guy at the table near the window? What if he comes here and offers a drink just like that?
... Anyone who accepts anything from him must be quite desperate in terms of attention, money, or both.
Ah, so isn't it more complicated? You're saying that his offer would offend you. His attempt to be nice would negatively affect your dignity.
We have different criteria for dignity. For example, some people cannot get themselves to cleaning toilet bowls, because they always had someone else to do it for them. For the rest of us, it has nothing to do with dignity. It's simply a matter of being responsible for your own living environment.
It makes a difference whether you do it for yourself, or for others and that for making a living.
Some tasks are unavoidable in any society. Public-toilet cleaning, garbage collecting, changing diapers of the elderly, to name a few. They need to be done by someone and we are collectively dependent on people who are in charge of them.
Other menial jobs, such as working on an assembly line and tending a convenience store, fit in that category as well.
Somebody's got to do what is considered menial, but everybody would rather do something else.
I'm sure some people prefer tending a store to lecturing computer science.
I agree, but consider the mix of financial rewards and social respect of the two jobs. Grosso modo, a professor scores higher than a store clerk.
What if the professor secretly generates and spreads computer viruses and the clerk is a jazz musician by night?
Oh, please, none of such exceptions! I want to keep our discussion simple.
I thought you wouldn't believe anything unless it's complicated.
Without denying that assessment in totality, let me say that...
You see? By the way, isn't the store clerk what he is because he slacked off in school? That is, by his own fault?
Shouldn't people who'd rather be professors be grateful because he is doing what they don't want to do?
Then, the clerk should be happy that the professors are doing what he doesn't want to do or can't do.
Think about an ideal society in which everyone studies hard and achieves the same level of education. Someone still has to clean public toilets. However, the respect for toilet cleaners would be lower than that for professors, as it always has been.
The cleaners' me-me-me desire would not be fulfilled... I think those with smaller me-me-me feelings become cleaners in any case.
Do you think they have absolutely zero of me-me-me?
That's possible.
I think not. They could be trained to be that way, but none of us is totally devoid of me-me-me.
What about the so-called saints?
As long as you are a living creature, me-me-me is in you. As if to make the point, offers for canonization are never declined.
That's because it happens after they're dead! What if we could train people to think that they are happy with cleaning jobs?
That's exactly what happens with class systems. Because people in power want others to do what they don't want to, they condition the lower class to think that they only deserve less desirable jobs.
I know that overt class-systems are out of fashion, but what is exactly wrong with them?
Their arbitrariness. If you happen to be born into an upper class family, you do not need to sacrifice your dignity, and if it is a low class family, you have to. You have no choice over it.
That happens even without class systems. If you are born into a rich family, you have better chances of getting better education and leading a more comfortable life. You have no choice whether to be born into a rich family or a poor one. The same with political connection.
Yes. The difference is that, with class systems, the entire society thinks that you are good for this, but not good enough for that. The labeling is rigid and has almost law-like status.
Forced changes in dignity criteria so that they fit the interests of the powerful...
Anyway, people who sacrifice their dignity for doing what needs to be done in the society should be rewarded for that.
I've read that you should observe during a dinner date how your date treats the servers, but it looks like you can substitute servers with garbage collectors.
In my opinion, that's the easy part. The difficult part is rewarding them financially. Undesirable, but necessary, jobs tend to be low skill, and hence, they command near minimum-wage. If we agree that it is impossible to have a normal life with such income, it means that they should be paid more.
What do you mean a normal life, here?
If you are healthy and work full-time in an honest job, you should be able to purchase a modest home, raise a family, give good education to the children, go on a vacation, and retire without serious monetary concerns. If you are sick, you should have access to affordable medical care and supplementary income; your children shouldn't starve simply because you fell ill.
That means relatively high prices of goods and/or taxes.
Just as I want to keep my dignity, I imagine others would want to do so as well. Cooperation is required to honor this fundamental desire for all, and that entails monetary adjustments.
Hmmm, I think you are particularly finicky about your dignity.
Ha, so much the better!
Posts
