When Our Minds Ponder: January 2014

January 23, 2014

The M Machine - Superflat

Fucking love the vocal samples on this song. Justice meets Deep Forest, glitches the fuck out

"What if everybody did that" is a retarded pragmatic argument. If somebody tells you that you shouldn't do something because "if everybody did that, it'd be bad," and they're trying to appeal to your pragmatic side ("if everybody did that, it'd be bad for you! And you don't want to make things worse for yourself now, do you?"), then they're full retard. If your participation in whatever action actually causes everybody else to do it, and in this sense that your action actually causes the bad outcome - then sure, a pragmatic argument makes sense. But most of the time, this isn't the case.

As an example, take voting. Many people argue that you should vote because "imagine how bad it'd be if nobody voted!" Sure, it'd be bad. It'd be bad for you. But unless you not voting causes everyone else to not vote, then who gives a fuck what hypothetically would be bad for you, if the hypothetical situation doesn't actually occur?

Taken as a moral argument, though, "What if everybody did that" makes sense. That is, it's perfectly sensible to argue that, whatever you want others to do, you ought to do yourself. Note the normative undertones here, compared to the pragmatic undertones above. Another way of putting this is that "being a free-rider is immoral." And I think I agree with this.

Going back to our example of voting, the argument makes sense if phrased as follows: "You want everybody else to vote, because if everybody didn't vote, it'd be bad. And since you ought to do what you want others to do, you ought to vote." If you agree agree with the moral premise ("you ought to do what you want others to do"), this argument makes perfect sense.

I frequently find my blood boiling when people make what I perceive to be pragmatic "what if everybody did that" arguments: "What if everybody didn't vote? What if everybody pirated movies? What if everybody littered? Wouldn't that suck? You don't like it when things suck, do you?" But perhaps I'm just misunderstanding people, and I'm assuming they're making pragmatic arguments, when really they're trying to make a moral one.

... or maybe people are just retarded.

[UPDATE]

I went and actually read the amazon description for the children book above. Here's an excerpt:

If you drop just one soda can out the window, it’s no big deal ... right? But what if everybody did that? What if everybody broke the rules ... Then the world would be a mess. ...Using humorous illustrations rendered in mixed media, these questions are answered in a child-friendly way and show the consequences of thoughtless behavior. [emphasis mine]

This last line support the "people are just retarded" hypothesis. "The world [being] a mess" is not a "consequence of [your] thoughtless behavior," goddammit!