The main thing that concerns me about NPC discourse is that, for one, it's a totally valid strategy that someone could purposefully choose as an intelligent choice, and for two, it assumes that a non-NPC pathway exists for the NPC. What if they have been systematically trained into that behavior and can no longer grasp an alternative? As a self-delusional person, how would they even know that they are NPCs (including myself, and yourself in this question). What if non-NPC behavior is only attainable by the cognitive elite, and even then only with training or other guidance (infected with moral virtues in your case)?
Also, my assumption is that everyone is an NPC some of the time, but perhaps not all of the time, and they vary in their %NPC.
1. SBF talked incessantly about Effective Altruism but, at least in the articles and interviews that I have read, he is remarkably vague as to how exactly he supposedly intended to benefit humanity and by what means he intended to do so. As a practical matter, mostly this seemed to be "contribute to Team D" and possibly "assist the Ukrainian regime in laundering money" but that somehow sounds less noble when you phrase it that way.
2. From the point of view of the rational selfish hedonist, the best Stag Hunt strategy of all is for everyone else to do the work and take the risks, but for the hedonist to claim and get a share of the kill when dinner time comes around. This is why "Objectivism" isn't especially objective.
A possible pernicious strain of NPC may be the "Golden Rule for thee and not for me" variety; that's a ridiculous position, as granting any exemption to anyone defeats the Rule's purpose. (Of course, if the person doesn't preach the Golden Rule then I won't mind so much.)
By the way, I'm developing an admiration for masochism: I'd rather be in the company of people who enjoy pain, than that of bitchy narcissists who wind up drawing in substantially-similar personalities (but with opposing views on whatever wedge-issue arises) and keep whining about it.
The main thing that concerns me about NPC discourse is that, for one, it's a totally valid strategy that someone could purposefully choose as an intelligent choice, and for two, it assumes that a non-NPC pathway exists for the NPC. What if they have been systematically trained into that behavior and can no longer grasp an alternative? As a self-delusional person, how would they even know that they are NPCs (including myself, and yourself in this question). What if non-NPC behavior is only attainable by the cognitive elite, and even then only with training or other guidance (infected with moral virtues in your case)?
Also, my assumption is that everyone is an NPC some of the time, but perhaps not all of the time, and they vary in their %NPC.
n.b.
1. SBF talked incessantly about Effective Altruism but, at least in the articles and interviews that I have read, he is remarkably vague as to how exactly he supposedly intended to benefit humanity and by what means he intended to do so. As a practical matter, mostly this seemed to be "contribute to Team D" and possibly "assist the Ukrainian regime in laundering money" but that somehow sounds less noble when you phrase it that way.
2. From the point of view of the rational selfish hedonist, the best Stag Hunt strategy of all is for everyone else to do the work and take the risks, but for the hedonist to claim and get a share of the kill when dinner time comes around. This is why "Objectivism" isn't especially objective.
A possible pernicious strain of NPC may be the "Golden Rule for thee and not for me" variety; that's a ridiculous position, as granting any exemption to anyone defeats the Rule's purpose. (Of course, if the person doesn't preach the Golden Rule then I won't mind so much.)
By the way, I'm developing an admiration for masochism: I'd rather be in the company of people who enjoy pain, than that of bitchy narcissists who wind up drawing in substantially-similar personalities (but with opposing views on whatever wedge-issue arises) and keep whining about it.