• AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    and with enough money I don’t care.

    Most people are like you.

    Which is precisely why humanity will be just another of many dead end evolutionary cul-de-sacs in Earth’s natural history.

    I’ve come to peace with that, but this is a nice microcosm of the core reason. We can do better, we know better, but at the end of the day, almost all of us will just take the animalistic dopamine rush of winning.

    Live together or die alone. We choose the second one like breathing.

    If most humans were like Kempf (we’re not), we’d actually have a chance.

    • MirthfulAlembic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      I don’t think this hypothetical is about winning so much as never having to worry about your needs being met again. The calculus changes completely for a lot of people (not optimistic enough to say most) if that’s not part of the equation.

        • Tja@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          11 months ago

          What are you talking about? Capitalism is the system that focused on (in some countries even created) the “middle class”, because it’s beneficiary to have a whole group of people that have all their needs met and have disposable income to keep the machine running.

          If you don’t have money for iPads, cars, vacations, avocado toast and fancy lattes, capitalism grinds to a halt and crumbles.

          The biggest companies and richest people of the world and not selling bread, water and shelter. They are selling fashion electronics, electric cars and ads on entertainment websites.

          • alekwithak@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            The middle class was created by the economic rights and protections provided by The New Deal and decades of unionization efforts. Crediting capitalism is not only disingenuous but also downright insulting to those who fought capitalists tooth and nail for what you’re crediting those capitalists for.

              • alekwithak@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                11 months ago

                Actually the term was coined at the 1939 Worlds Fair and popularized in '44 with Roosevelt’s signing of the GI Bill, but if you have even the smallest shred of evidence for your claims, go ahead, I’m humoring.

                • Tja@programming.dev
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  The term “middle class” is first attested in James Bradshaw’s 1745 pamphlet Scheme to prevent running Irish Wools to France.[6][7]

                  Go check the Wikipedia sources

                  • alekwithak@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    11 months ago

                    That’s not a source, that’s a number. You have to link the sources, you can’t just paste Wikipedia. In any case this is a discussion about specifically the American middle class.

                    Edit’: Also I found the Wikipedia article you’re citing and it directly contradicts your point: “The modern usage of the term “middle-class”, however, dates to the 1913 UK Registrar-General’s report, in which the statistician T.H.C. Stevenson identified the middle class as those falling between the upper-class and the working-class.[14] The middle class includes: professionals, managers, and senior civil servants. The chief defining characteristic of membership in the middle-class is control of significant human capital while still being under the dominion of the elite upper class, who control much of the financial and legal capital in the world.”

    • stebo@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      11 months ago

      Okay but why would we all take the money? Because we want to be rich? Or because we need to be rich in order to live a comfortable life?

      • AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        Because it makes us feel safe, and it makes us feel like we’ll be happy.

        I have a Master’s in Psychology, and I will always remember the disheartening feeling when I learned the most prevalent and accepted theory of what defines human happiness. Know what it is?

        Comparison to others.

        Very literally, the person in the tribe with the biggest mud hut is probably happier than you in your Chevrolet when your neighbor pulls up in a Cadillac.

        Yes, we really are that small as a rule.

        • Tinidril@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          Is that what makes us the most happy, or is it where we most often seek happiness? I don’t think they are the same thing. You aren’t going to find the happiest people in the world living in poverty, but I don’t think they are billionaires either.

        • SurpriZe@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          11 months ago

          What do you mean by the person in the tribe? Are you talking about a hypothetical tribal society and their happiness when removed from the civilized world as opposed to people in more modern communities?

          • AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            Yes. A hypothetical tribe. I’m saying happiness is completely relative, but based on comparison to immediate peers.

            • SurpriZe@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              And what can we do with this information, in psychology? Is there a way to shift focus away from it? Or is there something else to learn?