Philosophy Discussion Forums | A Humans-Only Club for Open-Minded Discussion & Debate

[Lagayascienza]

It's possible to be over-managed and over-governed, and it's possible to be under-managed and under-governed. A small business doesn't need much more than the owner to manage it. A large multi-national corporation will need many more levels of management. A well run liberal democracy needs some regulation and officials to manage that regulation. A dictatorship can be about mangement jobs for the boys and rampant corruption where regulation becomes meaningless and the country becomes an economic basket case. As always, it's about balance.

[Sy Borg]

Balancing control and latitude in complex societies with millions of people, many corporations, small businesses, advocacy groups and broad demographics is beyond any politician. They are all bluffing, pretending that they know what they are doing as they are constantly blindsided by events they did not foresee, or they find they are prevented from acting for logistical or political reasons.

Besides, given the dynamic nature of society, the very moment that you have achieved the perfect balance, that balance is already shifting. I sound like a broken record, but AI is humanity's only hope of sensible governance. It's possible, though, that if we are provided with truly rational and sensible governance, we might not like it.

[Thrylix]

I think Thyrlix is totally right in that people will be corrupt with power

Everyone needs to feel important. Many fulfill that already, others need to step on "ants" to accomplish it. Sad, really.

Maybe, but that is an oversimplification of my motivation and unfair.

Yes, people generally yearn to feel important, but feeling important would not (for me) the main pay-out in ruling over a civilization of intelligent ant-sized people. Even if it were, that feeling would quickly get old after a few days.

For me, personally, this is more about the fun of influencing and reshaping an entire society on a mass scale... determining the direction of an intelligent society.

It's better to think about it more like a sim game, I guess? Whenever I have played those, I certainly did not feel "important" since I was in a completely behind-the-scenes faceless role. Yet there was still fun to be had about in determining how the city or civilization would be shaped. Ruling over a tiny civilization of ant-sized people would just be an even more intense and immersive sandbox sim game for me, where I get to take a more direct role in the outcomes and indulge myself in other ways.

You're implying that my goal in this is to feel important by destroying something, or as you say, step on ants, but that isn't it. Would I experiment? Sure. Would I try to test the limits of their obedience or see how far they’d go to meet my needs? Of course I would push boundaries. My choice would be to terrorize and rule through fear, absolutely. Yet, I wouldn't be entirely malicious. I would not want to see the little guys get wiped out. Rather, I would actually prefer that their population thrive instead of decimate it. If they were threatened by a natural disaster, I would do everything I could to shield them from it. But, I would also want to be the natural disaster sometimes.

Overall, the main goal in this hypothetical is not about destroying something to feel important -- even though feeling important is a perk that is inherent to the role I am describing. There is more here than that. It is still about building something, even if it is abstract. This is about being architect, destroyer, and enforcer in a world where every outcome is tied to your will. If you want to tie that to one "feeling" that is being chased... perhaps it would be dominion.

[LuckyR]

I think Thyrlix is totally right in that people will be corrupt with power

Everyone needs to feel important. Many fulfill that already, others need to step on "ants" to accomplish it. Sad, really.

Maybe, but that is an oversimplification of my motivation and unfair.

Yes, people generally yearn to feel important, but feeling important would not (for me) the main pay-out in ruling over a civilization of intelligent ant-sized people. Even if it were, that feeling would quickly get old after a few days.

For me, personally, this is more about the fun of influencing and reshaping an entire society on a mass scale... determining the direction of an intelligent society.

It's better to think about it more like a sim game, I guess? Whenever I have played those, I certainly did not feel "important" since I was in a completely behind-the-scenes faceless role. Yet there was still fun to be had about in determining how the city or civilization would be shaped. Ruling over a tiny civilization of ant-sized people would just be an even more intense and immersive sandbox sim game for me, where I get to take a more direct role in the outcomes and indulge myself in other ways.

You're implying that my goal in this is to feel important by destroying something, or as you say, step on ants, but that isn't it. Would I experiment? Sure. Would I try to test the limits of their obedience or see how far they’d go to meet my needs? Of course I would push boundaries. My choice would be to terrorize and rule through fear, absolutely. Yet, I wouldn't be entirely malicious. I would not want to see the little guys get wiped out. Rather, I would actually prefer that their population thrive instead of decimate it. If they were threatened by a natural disaster, I would do everything I could to shield them from it. But, I would also want to be the natural disaster sometimes.

Overall, the main goal in this hypothetical is not about destroying something to feel important -- even though feeling important is a perk that is inherent to the role I am describing. There is more here than that. It is still about building something, even if it is abstract. This is about being architect, destroyer, and enforcer in a world where every outcome is tied to your will. If you want to tie that to one "feeling" that is being chased... perhaps it would be dominion.

Okay, if it makes you feel better to say it that way. What's wrong with a couple of harmless rationalizations between friends?

[Thrylix]

Okay, if it makes you feel better to say it that way. What's wrong with a couple of harmless rationalizations between friends?

But, I'm not just saying the same thing that you said differently. By suggesting in this hypothetical that I would essentially be stepping on ants to feel important, you are genuinely misunderstanding and mischaracterizing me...

Even when I go to step on actual ants on my back patio, I don't feel "important." I am fully aware that the ants who live there do not recognize me as the same giant sleazy asshole who has ruined their day a hundred times before, even though that is what I am. They do not even perceive me as another living organism who is doing this to them.... so I am not asserting my identity over them. I block the entrance to their home with my foot, and all the ants perceive is "Attack of the Giant Running Shoe." And they do not even comprehend that. From their perspective, my running shoe is just this huge white alien object that smells like decomposing rubber and old cheese. Regardless, there is still value in watching them swarm out from underneath to try and repel this unfathomable titanic object their home.

That is a lot closer to what would be the motivation for me in the case of an intelligent race. It is about witnessing and testing their reactions to external pressures and their impacts. But there would be so much more going on with respect to influencing their direction their society takes. And an intelligent race would of course recognize me, unlike the ants. Regardless, feeling important isn't the main goal here...And there would be more than just senseless destruction... I feel that I made that clear, ugh.

[Thrylix]

The perhaps greater attraction for me is the ability to command and force them into doing what I want, or else I crush them.

That's evil.

And I don't think concepts such as good or evil apply in my example. For one thing, we're talking about pretty extraordinary circumstances. But more importantly, in geopolitics, the concepts of "good and evil" or "right and wrong" are rarely, if ever, the primary drivers of action. Nations routinely penetrate one another’s cyber defenses, disrupt infrastructure, engage in data collection, support coups, and engage in economic warfare—not because these actions are morally justified, but because they are necessary to secure strategic advantages. The goal is not morality but achieving and maintaining an edge over rivals, ensuring survival and dominance in an adversarial system. This is analogous to the hypothetical I proposed, where the tiny civilization and myself as the giant are competing interests and each one could pose an existential threat to the other. Survival and dominance would be my goal. That isn't evil.

[Sy Borg]

The perhaps greater attraction for me is the ability to command and force them into doing what I want, or else I crush them.

That's evil.

And I don't think concepts such as good or evil apply in my example. For one thing, we're talking about pretty extraordinary circumstances. But more importantly, in geopolitics, the concepts of "good and evil" or "right and wrong" are rarely, if ever, the primary drivers of action. Nations routinely penetrate one another’s cyber defenses, disrupt infrastructure, engage in data collection, support coups, and engage in economic warfare—not because these actions are morally justified, but because they are necessary to secure strategic advantages. The goal is not morality but achieving and maintaining an edge over rivals, ensuring survival and dominance in an adversarial system. This is analogous to the hypothetical I proposed, where the tiny civilization and myself as the giant are competing interests and each one could pose an existential threat to the other. Survival and dominance would be my goal. That isn't evil.

I crush members of a tiny civilisation every day. They have some major population centres in my garden. Some people tell me that I should hire an exterminator, but I like little black ants. However, we sometimes come into competition. The nest sends lines of suicidal scavengers into my kitchen. Most of these meet a grisly end.

I could, of course, bring in an exterminator to wipe out the nest but they provide services, controlling insect pests that would eat garden plants.

If the ants posed an existential threat to me, they would be exterminated. However, they are just a inconvenience - the argy bargy of life, competing interests. I still like ants and would rather not kill the little intruders, but their numbers are such that catch and release would be a lot of messing around.

So, Thrylix, what do you do in situations where the intransigence of your tiny civilisation does not post an existential threat to you, but is merely inconvenient? After all, we don't kill our kids or dogs when they are disobedient (I hope).

[Thrylix]

I crush members of a tiny civilisation every day. They have some major population centres in my garden. Some people tell me that I should hire an exterminator, but I like little black ants. However, we sometimes come into competition. The nest sends lines of suicidal scavengers into my kitchen. Most of these meet a grisly end.

I could, of course, bring in an exterminator to wipe out the nest but they provide services, controlling insect pests that would eat garden plants.

If the ants posed an existential threat to me, they would be exterminated. However, they are just a inconvenience - the argy bargy of life, competing interests. I still like ants and would rather not kill the little intruders, but their numbers are such that catch and release would be a lot of messing around.

So, Thrylix, what do you do in situations where the intransigence of your tiny civilisation does not post an existential threat to you, but is merely inconvenient? After all, we don't kill our kids or dogs when they are disobedient (I hope).

Well you bring up an interesting point.

You are right, we do not harm kids or dogs. That carries severe legal, social, and moral repercussions, which I acknowledge and respect. And we tolerate their bad behavior because they do not know better.

However, as giant to the tiny civilization, I am not bound by their little rules and my actions are a pathway to maintaining control. Plus, since they would be intelligent, they do know better than dogs or children. So, if the tiny civilization were disobedient or inconvenient, even without posing a threat to me, that gives me a justification and an opportunity to exercise even more force than I could justify if they were obedient. Truthfully I would almost welcome the chance for them to act out militarily so that I could retaliate with equal or even disproportionately greater force. They learn a lesson and I get to leave my mark. Plus it would be cool to feel like I'm Godzilla haha... this lone colossal being repelling a whole army of tanks and tiny planes.

But, even if they were perfectly obedient, helpful, and posed no threat, I would still wish to conquer them and establish myself as their supreme being and make them feel perpetually unsafe and in existential dread. Why? Because I could. Assuming there were no consequences for me, I would not give them the freedom to be left alone from my kind attention. I am sure they would desperately wish that I just leave them alone in peace... just like the ants in my backyard probably just want to be left alone when I step on them. I would be just as much the unwelcome and unprovoked invader to both species, haha.

[Sy Borg]

I crush members of a tiny civilisation every day. They have some major population centres in my garden. Some people tell me that I should hire an exterminator, but I like little black ants. However, we sometimes come into competition. The nest sends lines of suicidal scavengers into my kitchen. Most of these meet a grisly end.

I could, of course, bring in an exterminator to wipe out the nest but they provide services, controlling insect pests that would eat garden plants.

If the ants posed an existential threat to me, they would be exterminated. However, they are just a inconvenience - the argy bargy of life, competing interests. I still like ants and would rather not kill the little intruders, but their numbers are such that catch and release would be a lot of messing around.

So, Thrylix, what do you do in situations where the intransigence of your tiny civilisation does not post an existential threat to you, but is merely inconvenient? After all, we don't kill our kids or dogs when they are disobedient (I hope).

Well you bring up an interesting point.

You are right, we do not harm kids or dogs. That carries severe legal, social, and moral repercussions, which I acknowledge and respect. And we tolerate their bad behavior because they do not know better.

However, as giant to the tiny civilization, I am not bound by their little rules and my actions are a pathway to maintaining control. Plus, since they would be intelligent, they do know better than dogs or children. So, if the tiny civilization were disobedient or inconvenient, even without posing a threat to me, that gives me a justification and an opportunity to exercise even more force than I could justify if they were obedient. Truthfully I would almost welcome the chance for them to act out militarily so that I could retaliate with equal or even disproportionately greater force. They learn a lesson and I get to leave my mark. Plus it would be cool to feel like I'm Godzilla haha... this lone colossal being repelling a whole army of tanks and tiny planes. :D

But, even if they were perfectly obedient, helpful, and posed no threat, I would still wish to conquer them and establish myself as their supreme being and make them feel perpetually unsafe and in existential dread. Why? Because I could. Assuming there were no consequences for me, I would not give them the freedom to be left alone from my kind attention. I am sure they would desperately wish that I just leave them alone in peace... just like the ants in my backyard probably just want to be left alone when I step on them. :mrgreen: I would be just as much the unwelcome and unprovoked invader to both species, haha.

Haha! You sound like Kim. He does things to his people simply because he is subject to no higher authority, and the edicts often don't have any point but to drive home his dominance, eg. inventing stories about his superhuman feats, which everyone must accept - or else.

Would you be like Kim if you were in his situation, or would you put your atavistic impulses aside for the sake of national prosperity?

[Thrylix]

Haha! You sound like Kim. He does things to his people simply because he is subject to no higher authority, and the edicts often don't have any point but to drive home his dominance, eg. inventing stories about his superhuman feats, which everyone must accept - or else.

Would you be like Kim if you were in his situation, or would you put your atavistic impulses aside for the sake of national prosperity?

I get why you would make that comparison...but I disagree with your premise. Kim Jong Un is a pretty rational actor and not just operating on some primitive level.

His main concern is his own personal survival, certainly, but that is true for everybody. However, I think that he probably believes that his style of rule is necessary for national prosperity in North Korea. It's kind of a package deal for him. Kim Jong Un wants to ensure the stability of North Korea...because stability in North Korea is necessary for his own survival. And despite how miserable it is there, I still would suspect that Kim believes that his family has provided North Korea with the only style of leadership that would work over there, significantly because of they themselves. The edicts and superhuman stories are just part of a broad, calculated effort to "legitimize" his rule as a divine figure and crushing dissent is how he maintains his grip on power. They are tools and don't exist arbitrarily.

[Sy Borg]

Haha! You sound like Kim. He does things to his people simply because he is subject to no higher authority, and the edicts often don't have any point but to drive home his dominance, eg. inventing stories about his superhuman feats, which everyone must accept - or else.

Would you be like Kim if you were in his situation, or would you put your atavistic impulses aside for the sake of national prosperity?

I get why you would make that comparison...but I disagree with your premise. Kim Jong Un is a pretty rational actor and not just operating on some primitive level.

His main concern is his own personal survival, certainly, but that is true for everybody. However, I think that he probably believes that his style of rule is necessary for national prosperity in North Korea. It's kind of a package deal for him. Kim Jong Un wants to ensure the stability of North Korea...because stability in North Korea is necessary for his own survival. And despite how miserable it is there, I still would suspect that Kim believes that his family has provided North Korea with the only style of leadership that would work over there, significantly because of they themselves. The edicts and superhuman stories are just part of a broad, calculated effort to "legitimize" his rule as a divine figure and crushing dissent is how he maintains his grip on power. They are tools and don't exist arbitrarily.

It's hard to know what Kim believes as opposed to what he asserts. It seems his leadership style is a throwback to Middle Ages royalty or even the pharoahs. Those societies managed to remain stable for a long time although a mitigating factor is that everything changes more quickly now than in the past. Kim's primitive approach cannot compete with more modern sophisticated societies in roughly the same way as marsupials can't compete with placental mammals, or chimps can't compete with humans.

In the world's evolving political "ecosystem", totalitarian/hard authoritarian societies are like crocodiles - a tried and tested, robust and stable primitive form that survived the ages, and is capable of can dominating its local area, but will be out-competed in most terrains by bigger, smarter and more nimble species. Both crocodiles and authoritarians have little growth and development potential. Each is a foundational system.

[Thrylix]

It's hard to know what Kim believes as opposed to what he asserts. It seems his leadership style is a throwback to Middle Ages royalty or even the pharoahs. Those societies managed to remain stable for a long time although a mitigating factor is that everything changes more quickly now than in the past. Kim's primitive approach cannot compete with more modern sophisticated societies in roughly the same way as marsupials can't compete with placental mammals, or chimps can't compete with humans.

In the world's evolving political "ecosystem", totalitarian/hard authoritarian societies are like crocodiles - a tried and tested, robust and stable primitive form that survived the ages, and is capable of can dominating its local area, but will be out-competed in most terrains by bigger, smarter and more nimble species. Both crocodiles and authoritarians have little growth and development potential. Each is a foundational system.

Well I agree with you—most authoritarian systems have been maladaptive. Although resilient, existing dictatorships, once they establish power, are inherently resistant to change and that is why most are ill-suited to compete against modern nations, unable to innovate or adapt to the increasingly rapid shifts in global systems. As you say, those systems are crocodilian—primitive, basic, and limited in their ability to evolve.

However, one thing that has never been clear to me about North Korea is the extent to which its people recognize that they are being manipulated and oppressed. The existence of defectors suggest that at least some of them know the truth. I imagine the ones in hard labor camps probably do, too. Does the majority know what is going on, though? Or, is it more like what I said earlier about the ants that I squash in my backyard:

"I block the entrance to their home with my foot, and all the ants perceive is 'Attack of the Giant Running Shoe.' And they do not even comprehend that. From their perspective, my running shoe is just this huge white alien object that smells like decomposing rubber and old cheese."

The ants see this unnatural huge white thing on their home, they can feel its vibrations as I press my running shoe down, and even smell my stinky feet radiating from the interior. From a sensory standpoint it's all undoubtedly very unpleasant to them, yet all that sensory input I described still has no meaning to them. They can’t recognize me as the giant asshole wearing the shoe. But they still respond predictably to my unwelcome presence every time I go to mess with them. What the people of North Korea experience seems analogous to the ants I step on —ignorant of the machinations behind the forces that crush them. The difference, though, is that unlike the ants, the North Koreans put a face on their tormentor, yet still see him as their protector. Meanwhile, they respond to being "stepped on" as just predictably as the ants in my backyard. The North Koreans react to the shoe but they don’t even comprehend its true nature, much less how to challenge it effectively.

Personally I think I would make a much more effective and charming leader than Kim. I’d lean into the dynamic with more intention and experimentation. I’d create new pressures, manipulate responses, and shape the society in ways that would keep them from stagnating. Plus, let’s be honest—I doubt Kim runs 10 miles a day or plays tennis half as well as I do.

[Sy Borg]

It's hard to know what Kim believes as opposed to what he asserts. It seems his leadership style is a throwback to Middle Ages royalty or even the pharoahs. Those societies managed to remain stable for a long time although a mitigating factor is that everything changes more quickly now than in the past. Kim's primitive approach cannot compete with more modern sophisticated societies in roughly the same way as marsupials can't compete with placental mammals, or chimps can't compete with humans.

In the world's evolving political "ecosystem", totalitarian/hard authoritarian societies are like crocodiles - a tried and tested, robust and stable primitive form that survived the ages, and is capable of can dominating its local area, but will be out-competed in most terrains by bigger, smarter and more nimble species. Both crocodiles and authoritarians have little growth and development potential. Each is a foundational system.

Well I agree with you—most authoritarian systems have been maladaptive. Although resilient, existing dictatorships, once they establish power, are inherently resistant to change and that is why most are ill-suited to compete against modern nations, unable to innovate or adapt to the increasingly rapid shifts in global systems. As you say, those systems are crocodilian—primitive, basic, and limited in their ability to evolve.

However, one thing that has never been clear to me about North Korea is the extent to which its people recognize that they are being manipulated and oppressed. The existence of defectors suggest that at least some of them know the truth. I imagine the ones in hard labor camps probably do, too. Does the majority know what is going on, though? Or, is it more like what I said earlier about the ants that I squash in my backyard:

It's not clear to anyone, I suspect, given that there are generations who have been indoctrinated since birth. We know there are some refugees, so some realise things are wrong, although once they arrive at the west they find out the extent to which they had been misled.

"I block the entrance to their home with my foot, and all the ants perceive is 'Attack of the Giant Running Shoe.' And they do not even comprehend that. From their perspective, my running shoe is just this huge white alien object that smells like decomposing rubber and old cheese."

The ants see this unnatural huge white thing on their home, they can feel its vibrations as I press my running shoe down, and even smell my stinky feet radiating from the interior. From a sensory standpoint it's all undoubtedly very unpleasant to them, yet all that sensory input I described still has no meaning to them. They can’t recognize me as the giant asshole wearing the shoe. But they still respond predictably to my unwelcome presence every time I go to mess with them. What the people of North Korea experience seems analogous to the ants I step on —ignorant of the machinations behind the forces that crush them. The difference, though, is that unlike the ants, the North Koreans put a face on their tormentor, yet still see him as their protector. Meanwhile, they respond to being "stepped on" as just predictably as the ants in my backyard. The North Koreans react to the shoe but they don’t even comprehend its true nature, much less how to challenge it effectively.

Personally I think I would make a much more effective and charming leader than Kim. I’d lean into the dynamic with more intention and experimentation. I’d create new pressures, manipulate responses, and shape the society in ways that would keep them from stagnating. Plus, let’s be honest—I doubt Kim runs 10 miles a day or plays tennis half as well as I do.

Now you seem like our current western governments, who import millions of people whose culture is barely compatible with the home culture, and crush-load them to see how closely packed the a̶n̶t̶s̶ people can be packed together. They watch us to see how we react to ever more intense competition for work, accommodation, education, healthcare and welfare. Just mix 'em all together and watch the various groups duke it out. Meanwhile the politicians stand aloof atop the restless melees, casting judgement on various sub-groups to stir the pot.

But ... let's get serious. You cannot compete with Kim. According to his team, Kim learned to walk at three weeks old and began speaking at eight weeks. He was driving at age three (tiny cars?) and he is a world-class golfer. He wrote 1,500 books during his time at university and composed six of the greatest operas in history. He can also apparently fly. His tennis ability would make Jannik Sinner and Djoka look like bums. There is no info regarding how far Kim runs per day but, given what we know, it's safe to presume that he runs at least 500kms per day before breakfast, as evidenced by his fabulously athletic physique.

Regarding your claim, a broken watch would make a much more effective and charming leader than Kim, so I have little doubt that you'd best him there. The trouble with stimulating minds in your society to prevent stagnation is that stimulated minds are questioning minds. The choice is ultimately between stagnation and unrest.