• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Chat thread 1331: Just talkin’ chickens. This is better.

Status
Not open for further replies.
ImTheCaptain said:
reminds of a recent reddit post i saw; it was on the issue of the goldman internship abuse. one guy said, unironically, how great those coveted positions at investment banks are and now that he's a senior partner he only puts in like 50 hours a week and typical/that's on the end for upper management

sounds awful
Click to expand...

I think at some point in those jobs you get addicted to the work. I see a lot of lawyers that don’t need the money putting in long hours past retirement age because its what they know. And in some cases it’s what their spouses know.

Even now I have a tough time relaxing when I’m on vacation or over a holiday weekend because I feel like I need to be doing something. I also like what I do though.
 
i am not what you would call a "hard worker"

i think it came from smoking weed every day from ~ age 15 to 25

this week at work i've pulled a couple 12 hr days and then turned around and took care of a teething baby and i have to say it is simply not for me

i didn't major in english with 3/4 of a minor in art history and a 2.9 GPA for this life, no sir
 
Ugh I had the crossword done in well under 20 but then took another few mins to switch out a couple things. Missed setting a new thurs best.
 
I'm selling an NFT of a timed screenshot of plamab3's penis on OGBoards via auction this Friday night
 
Re Meritocracy trap:

Yes, all of that makes sense and tracks with the complexity of issues I've been struggling with for a long time: it's not actually equality we want but rather equal opportunity to succeed despite environmental, economic, racial, social factors, etc.

Smart people, attractive people, physically gifted people are still going to rise to the top even if we could control for various kinds of privilege. There's something blatantly *unfair* about that because those are largely products of genetics (which of course can be affected by all of those factors in the first paragraph, etc.). *Harrison Bergeron* comes to mind for all of you who remember high school English.

There is perhaps an analogous conversation in discussions of mental illness and where the DSM and pysch community and justice system draw the lines between disorder vs disability vs. criminal behavior. Little of this is someone's actual fault or the result of their own choices or whatever. A serial killer or pedophile or abuser are all sufferers of mental illness but we have rightfully decided that they pose a danger to society and are fundamentally different in kind from sufferers of other mental illnesses.

The logical end for me is to just try to treat everybody equally and not blame anybody for anything out of their control. But that doesn't always make sense
 
Last edited:
Well there's a rambling lunchtime chat post for y'all to chew up and spit out
 
wakephan09 said:
Re Meritocracy trap:

Yes, all of that makes sense and tracks with the complexity of issues I've been struggling with for a long time: it's not actually equality we want but rather equal opportunity to succeed despite environmental, economic, racial, social factors, etc.

Smart people, attractive people, physically gifted people are still going to rise to the top even if we could control for various kinds of privilege. There's something blatantly *unfair* about that because those are largely products of genetics (which of course can be affected by all of those factors in the first paragraph, etc.). *Harrison Bergeron* comes to mind for all of you who remember high school English.

There is perhaps an analogous conversation in discussions of mental illness and where the DSM and pysch community and justice system draw the lines between disorder vs disability vs. criminal behavior. Little of this is someone's actual fault or the result of their own choices or whatever. A serial killer or pedophile or abuser are all sufferers of mental illness but we have rightfully decided that they pose a danger to society and are fundamentally different in kind from sufferers of other mental illnesses.

The logical end for me is to just try to treat everybody equally and not blame anybody for anything out of their control. But that doesn't always make sense
Click to expand...

There is legitimate economics literature on a height tax, because being tall is such an advantage.
 
Chat thread 1331: Creamy hopes his doc has tiny hands

I believe everyone is in the top 1% in some trait, skill, or ability but our society doesn’t identity or value all traits, skills, and abilities. For example, our educational institutions generally formally identify people who are good at retaining information, taking tests, repetitive mental or physical exercises, critical thinking, and athletics. Those are highly valued in society but are nowhere near an exhausted list of traits, skills, and abilities.

In this respect, meritocracy is a problem in that it is very limited.

Another issue is that I don’t think we use a complete definition of meritocracy.

————-

mer·i·toc·ra·cy
/ˌmerəˈtäkrəsē/
noun
noun: meritocracy
government or the holding of power by people selected on the basis of their ability.
"progress towards meritocracy was slow"
a society governed by meritocracy.
plural noun: meritocracies
"Britain is a meritocracy, and everyone with skill and imagination may aspire to reach the highest level"
a ruling or influential class of educated or skilled people.
"the relentless advance of the meritocracy"
—————

That definition does not account for the fact that if we believe a society to be a meritocracy then we believe the people in power are in power based on their ability.

So a meritocracy is a system in which people with the most ability rise to the top with a corollary that we assume people at the top have ability.

It’s hard to have a true meritocracy in a capitalist society because people money and resources will use them to gain power. And that society will equal wealth, even inherited wealth, with ability. That’s how you get people who assume Trump is smart because he’s rich and cons gullible people.
 
Last edited:
PhDeac said:
I believe everyone is in the top 1% in some trait, skill, or ability but our society doesn’t identity or value all traits, skills, and abilities. For example, our educational institutions generally formally identify people who are good at retaining information, taking tests, repetitive mental or physical exercises, critical thinking, and athletics. Those are highly valued in society but are nowhere near an exhausted list of traits, skills, and abilities.
Click to expand...

Time for the chat thread activity of identifying what every poster is a top 1% in.
 
actually very likely in the top 1% of sweaty hands. #hyperhidrosisgang
 
Of course everyone is top 1% in something. You can be in the top 1% of not retaining information, failing tests, doing non repetitive mental or physical exercises, non-critical thinking, and being sedentary. Those skills, traits, and abilities are just not highly valued in society.
 
Top 1% of not getting laid as much as I should have
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top