More stupid people die. Why are we supposed to care?

The BBQ Pit
101

That seems like a limitation on your projection skills, not the idea of modelling in general :

Not even a little? You’ve never felt the thrill of going fast on a bicycle, or the rush of a roller-coaster ride, or the adrenaline rush of a near-miss accident? I find that hard to believe. I know I have, and so, even though neither I nor anyone close to me is into extreme sports, I can still project enough to have an inkling of what an extreme sport enthusiast might be experiencing. Enough of an inkling to build a mental model sufficient for empathy.

Empathy merely requires that I understand them, not that I be them.

This does not mean everyone is capable of feeling empathy to the same degree. Some people have limited affect in that regard. That’s perfectly OK, but it in no way means that empathy itself is limited to the degree those persons’ empathetic skills are.

You may well be one of those people, but don’t project that onto the rest of us who are capable of feeling empathy for people not in our supposed “monkeysphere”. Or tell us the empathy we feel isn’t “real”.

102

Dude, you started a Pit thread about the accidental death of an extreme-sports champion taking a calculated risk for a sporting achievement with the sentence “Some idiot skis off a mountain in Nepal.” If you are not actually an asshole, then you are doing an excellent asshole cosplay here.

You are totally entitled to behave like an asshole in the Pit about almost anything that gets your dander up, of course. But if you voluntarily choose to start Pit threads to behave like an asshole, then don’t whine about the very natural consequence that other people will tend to think you are an asshole. (Especially not while you’re calling other people whiners.)

103

Certainly not in a near-miss accident. I’ve only felt like puking from those. I do get a rush from roller coasters because I know they’re exceptionally safe and so there is no part of me saying I’m about to die.

The limitation is with the fact that my brain is about 3 pounds, and so is yours. People close to me get a small chunk of that valuable mass and strangers do not.

If the type of empathy you feel toward those close to you is qualitatively the same as any old stranger, I think the limitation is with you, not me. I know what makes my friends tick and so I can easily empathize with them, even on things that aren’t the same for me. But I can’t make the same evaluation for strangers.

How do you know that the skier was an adrenaline junkie, anyway? Maybe she wasn’t; maybe she was steeped in terror every minute she was on the slopes, but was driven to the activity by parents that pushed her toward being first in everything. Or, maybe she was simply incapable of perceiving risk properly, and felt neither fear nor an adrenaline rush. I know what I would feel in that situation, but it has nothing to do with what she actually felt, and without knowing her there’s no way for me to even approximate it.

104

I didn’t say it was.

That it’s not the same degree doesn’t make it not real.

“Hard” is not the same as “impossible”

Empathy is always and only a reaction to our own perceptions, not magic telepathy. Even with those closest to us. So I don’t have to know she was, I only have to suppose she was. The empathy that results is the same whether she was or no.

Empathy never does. None of us are mind-readers.

105

That guess makes sense. Because editing nowadays is el crapo.

106

The Buddha and several of his earlier followers were traveling somewhere on foot. They came to a river crossing and found a girl there pacing back and forth worriedly. The river had risen making it impossible for her to cross. The Buddha invited her to climb upon his back and together they crossed the chest-high river along with the acolytes.

She thanked him and they went their separate ways. Later as they were resting, one of the acolytes accosted The Buddha. “How could you let her touch you? You could have fallen to temptation!”

The Buddha answered, “I set her down three hours ago. You are carrying her still.”

107

No, but with people close to me, I can see how close I came. And know that I’m getting close most of the time.

A bit of a silly example: a while back I was at a party with one of my best friends and several others. There was a party game where one person gets chosen, everyone gets a prompt, and you have to (anonymously) write an answer pretending that you’re that other person. You get points based on how many people picked your answer, thinking it was the other person. Well, my best friend was picked, and I got a perfect score on that round. Every single person in the room picked my answer over his, including his wife. And I picked the correct answer out of all the others.

There’s no way I could have done that if I didn’t have a pretty good mental model of my friend. I didn’t just predict his answer; I came up with an exaggerated version of an answer he might have made.

I can never know for sure if my model is valid, but every interaction is an “experiment” and I can observe if I was right or wrong.

If you’re willing to call that empathy, more power to you. I’m not. I think there needs to be at least some reasonable probability that my idea of what they felt is close to what they actually felt. Otherwise–why bother? I’m not empathizing with them; I’m empathizing with a fake version of them.

108

Sounds more like you had good mental models of everyone else, since it’s their responses that counted, not your friend’s.

Also, thinking like another person, as in that game, is not the same as feeling like the person. Both are empathy, but we were clearly discussing emotional empathy, not cognitive empathy, so this feels like moving the goalposts somewhat.

That’s certainly a way of going through the world.

And your basis for judging the probability is?

Do you think empathy is something you consciously will?

All versions of Others are “fake” versions of Them.

Getting tired of typing this, but empathy is not magical telepathy.

109

Sure, it wasn’t meant as an exact analogy. Just the first example that came to mind of something where I had objective evidence that my mental models (which, as you indicate, includes the other people in the room) were correct, at least in some narrow way.

I put “experiment” in quotes because I am obviously not taking notes on this. And yet, every time I get someone a gift, for example, I can tell if they really appreciated it or just gave polite thanks. And one way or another, I file away that information and refine my mental model slightly. It’s not explicit; we’re all doing this kind of thing, all the time. Our brains are constantly making predictive models of other brains and the rest of the world, and comparing the results against predictions.

For strangers, I have no basis. For friends/family, my basis is all the other times where I got things right.

110

No. You perceive either sincere thanks or politesse. You assume that matches reality. Absent interrogation, you can’t actually claim to tell (and even then it’s not conclusive).

No basis? Because you’ve never interacted with strangers, nor read or heard their words on the subject of their feelings?

111

Speaking as a cranky old white guy, I repeat Forrest Gump’s immortal words: “stupid is as stupid does.”

My Winter Palace is in a tropical location, 10 minutes from the nearest public beach and half an hour from the nearest world-class snorkeling. It was hit head-on by a super typhoon last December. It suffered no damage because it is very well built and is 155 feet above sea level in a location that will never be flooded. The entire province was without electricity for three months. I made a wise choice to be on the other side of the planet at the time. Rather than just be smug about my foresight, I allowed some of the needy natives to use the house as shelter during the storm and contributed money for food after.

That’s how to be a cranky old white dude with empathy.

112

In the end, it’s because many people enjoy watching “ridiculously stupid people” doing ridiculously stupid things, especially things that get them killed in a spectacular fashion. It’s all about ratings so, in a sense, we the public are tailoring the news. It’s not something to which we are being subjected, it’s actually what we really want.

Jasmine (sitting in a chair and appearing as only a dark silhouette with voice going through a voice distorter): “Yes, I’ve always enjoyed watching the “suicide by selfie” videos on the Internet. I watch as many as I can, and I get gleeful entertainment watching the demise of those absurdly dumb people who basically impress their friends and viewers by creatively killing themselves.” (Hangs head)

113

The bit that lingers for me in each of the threads that @Dinsdale has started that’s essentially along these same lines (ie, “Why should I care about X person/people?”) is his job – Administrative Law Judge for the Social Security Administration (I’m not doxxing him. He’s been very open about his occupation).

From the SSA website:

Becoming an Administrative Law Judge gives you the opportunity to improve the lives of others by ensuring everyone is treated fairly, impartially, and compassionately.

I sincerely hope that the part of you that presides over these cases is distinct and separate from the part of you that asks these questions, because:

  • You truly play God with these people’s lives, and
  • You truly seem to exhibit a rather strong lack of empathy on these threads

In a perfect world, I’d imagine you being a resource that helps others gain insight into the plight of those less fortunate than we are. It seems like something one could readily glean from your perch.

I also wonder whether you’d benefit from trying to chat with the subjects of these various stories – the people about whom you’re struggling desperately to give a shit – rather than chatting with your ‘golf buddies’ about the stories and the people in them.

Get out of your bubble once in a while. It seems like it’s well past time.

114

First, those aren’t mutually exclusive acts.

Second, Hilaree’s skiing exploits have given joy, wonder, and inspiration to a community of skiers, explorers, and armchair adventurers. You dismiss this because you’re not in that community (I assume, please correct me if I’m wrong) but to many it indeed improves our lives.

There are endeavors in this world that are worthwhile without providing food or shelter to people. Things that feed the soul and spirit are also worthwhile.

115

Yes, I was agreeing with you. Maybe it’s a conservative old people thing, but it’s like “HOW DARE this thing exist in the same world as ME!”

116

How nice for you that you live somewhere natural disasters never strike. Where might that be, out of curiosity’s sake?

117

I think that is a very legitimate observation. Thanks. And I think I do approach my job differently than I approach posting on message boards. (Don’t most people? I would HOPE so!)

Everyone who appears before me claims they are disabled. Most of them probably believe that. And most (not all) are in very unfortunate circumstances. But should I simply pay everyone who appears before me? Or should I apply my personal standards of who is sympathetic or “deserving”?

I have long thought that something insufficient publicity is given to the fact that SS disability is widely considered a de facto general welfare program. But I am not interested in getting into a general discussion of my views of SS disability programs. And nothing I have ever posted on-line represents other than my personal views.

Whether anyone believes me or not, I truly support our government providing considerable assistance for such people. Hell, I’ve posted here my support for universal income. But again, I’m not going to try to use this thread to convince anyone that I am or am not, as a whole, a “good guy.” To the extent I decry wealth inequities, I have mused that I could do something about that, by paying more and more claims. Basically directing cash to some of the most needy. But SS disability IS NOT intended to be a general welfare program. I took an oath to administer the disability program as written. And however sympathetic an individual may be, if they do not meet the legal requirements of the Act and regs, I think it would be improper for me to commit federal funds simply out of my personal preferences and sympathies.

The extent to which I must weigh empathy and objectivity in my job is something I think of often. Believe me, if I wanted my job to be easier, the simplest thing would be to pay more cases. Would that be desirable? That I commit taxes you paid into, to people who clearly do not meet the legal requirements of the program, simply because I feel some personal empathy for them? Or to support my personal views of social equity?

The same way so many people seem to think EVERY person who died in Ian was some poor, disabled person who couldn’t comprehend the danger/warnings, and lacked the resources to get to safety, many people seem to believe that everyone who applies for SS disability benefits is deserving of them. Last time I checked, the national average pay rate across some 1200 ALJs was in the low 40s%. These are people who were initially denied, denied a second time upon reconsideration, and sought a hearing. On average, 1200 ALJs believe 55-60% of such people do not meet the requirements of the program.

The percentage of claims I pay is somewhat below the national average, but by no means am I a statistical outlier. Someone suggested I speak with survivors of Ian. Whatever I bring to/take away from the table, in my job, I have the opportunity to have in depth conversations with truly needy and unfortunate people on an ongoing basis. Doesn’t make me special or my views correct, but I suspect I have had much more opportunity to speak at length with unfortunate individuals than many people.

And other people have asked whether I’m an asshole by nature, or whether my job has made me one. A little of both, I suspect.

Here in the midwest (Chicago area), we get a RARE tornado. And people do die following extremely hot or cold spells - despite public warming/cooling shelters. But we do not regularly get hurricanes, forest fires, earthquakes… And we have plenty of fresh water. Much of the rust belt impresses me as pretty climatologically safe. Waiting for New Madrid II! :wink:

Coincidentally, yesterday’s Chicago Trib’s real estate section had an article that started off (paraphrased and emphasis added): “Wildfires are increasingly common due to climate change, yet increasing numbers of people are MOVING TO areas that are most susceptible to such fires.” I hope they pay for good insurance.

118

The classic rejoinder:

119

Do they?

Another way to look at it is that AFAIK, Hilaree Nelson wasn’t going to live forever anyway so she decided to devote her life to the pursuit of doing awesome shit like skiing down one of the highest mountains in the world.

And yet, if I rounded up all those people at the charity and threw them off a mountain, you would be calling ME a monster!

It is possible I might have missed the comparison here.

120

When is the number 0 “so many”? You’ve been hard at work building lots of straw men, you must be tired, poor thing. :sob:

Not a single person here has made the claim that everyone who died in Ian couldn’t help themselves.

On the contrary, you’ve explicitly said that a poor, disabled person deserved to die.

You’re a troll or sociopath, I’m not sure yet. Either way, you’re a shitty person, but I’m kind of leaning toward troll. Your story as presented doesn’t add up.

You don’t seem particularly intelligent, and clearly lack social maturity, but you claim to be in a career that would require both. I don’t buy it.

You also ask dumb, provocative questions that seem engineered to evoke strong negative reactions from 99% of the human population. Pretty trolly.

I think you’re yanking everyone’s chain for your own jollies here.