Comment by spoonfeeder006
2 months ago
Whats the difference between "idiots have to be scammed" vs "people who can't fend off a knife fighter while en route to the grocery store have to be stabbed"?
Some people are gullible, or trusting. This doesn't mean they don't have other gifts, or most of all good intentions. Applying an evolutionary pressure against people who can't fend off knife attackers is ultimately useless for human wellbeing
The real issue in the world isn't people not being smart enough to fend off attacks, but greed and ego
And besides, what is the root of such a 'idiot' person's deficiencies in the first place? Is it genetics? Or is it education, upbringing, early life traumas that stunt development?
Besides, the whole point of having fit genes in the first place is to bring about human happiness. If we use this to make people miserable it then shows that there is no substance to our perspective
> O CHILDREN OF MEN! Know ye not why We created you all from the same dust? That no one should exalt himself over the other. Ponder at all times in your hearts how ye were created. Since We have created you all from one same substance it is incumbent on you to be even as one soul, to walk with the same feet, eat with the same mouth and dwell in the same land, that from your inmost being, by your deeds and actions, the signs of oneness and the essence of detachment may be made manifest. Such is My counsel to you, O concourse of light! Heed ye this counsel that ye may obtain the fruit of holiness from the tree of wondrous glory.
> ~ Bahá’u’lláh
There’s obviously a huge difference between a scam and a violent attack. The person being scammed doesn’t ever lose their agency and willingly participates. That’s very different from a knife attack, where the victim would leave at every moment if possible.
Informed consent is missing in both cases.
The person in the knife fight also doesn’t lose their agency. The choices they made just led to an outcome they didn’t expect.
This all ultimately boils down to "the attacks that I believe I'm immune to are okay, the attacks that I'm not immune to are not okay."
The victim in your knife attack had the opportunity to leave by never going to the grocery store. The fact they couldn't foresee that attack is solely because they lacked the information or cognitive ability to foresee it, just like an 80 IQ gambler with a Draftkings account lacks the information/cognitive ability to foresee the attack on him.
So many people walk around with the implicit ethical system that 80 IQers don't deserve to have a decent life in the modern world. That is obviously despicable once it's stated explicitly.
No, your argument is basically “all bad things are equivalent to knife attacks.” Look, I’m not saying deception and scamming are “ok”, I’m just saying comparing them to knife attacks is stupid.
3 replies →
> There’s obviously a huge difference between a scam and a violent attack.
I do not agree with that statement. You're just justifying anti-social behavior.
Would you rather be scammed or stabbed? According to you, you should be indifferent. Personally, I’d prefer to be scammed.
1 reply →
It's always easy to think that until you will be the one being manipulated and scammed.
Scammers target people who can be easily manipulated so that they can mostly remove targets’ agency. The victim doesn’t know that it’s a scam, so why would they run?
[dead]
>Whats the difference between "idiots have to be scammed" vs "people who can't fend off a knife fighter while en route to the grocery store have to be stabbed"?
Consent.
You're missing a key word: informed consent. Both are lacking that.
The gap between consent and informed consent is narrow.
The gap between consent and threat of violence may as well be the grand canyon.
1 reply →
[dead]