MetaGame
Connective tissue for the DAO world. https://enter.metagame.wtf
δυς pfp
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
δυς pfp
"That is where ~80% of the population stops. Kohlberg devised a series of moral quandries through which he could determine an individual's likely level from their responses to questions. "He found that most people are Conventional and largely rely on 'social proof' — the general social consensus — to determine truth. "It is in the progression out of conventionality that one lands on positions such as yours where, because there are a variety of viewpoints and no definitive answer as to which are the most true, everyone's opinions carry the same weight. "The step beyond convention is 'Social Contract' where the thinker begins to piece together coherent moral narratives that govern how they behave toward others. "Finally, one can arrive at 'Universal Moral Principles' where every action is an expression of philosophical belief. Not many people live like this. 😼"
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
δυς pfp
"Sorry, there are more advanced modes of thought than the one you're currently at. "I'd recommend checking out the moral development theorist, Lawrence Kohlberg. "He writes about how, through the lifetime, individuals seem to go through a common set of up to six stages of development. "They're broken up into three plateaus: preconventional, conventional, & postconventional. Where you're at is conventionality where truth is determined through social consensus. "The scale starts out preconventional. A small child who does things to avoid punishment. From there it progresses to choosing actions to win rewards. "They're inherently more self-centered because you're thinking primarily in terms of how it will affect yourself. "The next major progression is discovering the desire to be seen as a good and worthwhile person to others. From there, they progress to "Law & Order" where they value the wider rules and structures of society. 2/?
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
δυς pfp
I'm in a Facebook group chat associated with the channel "Believe In Reality". They said, "Nothing wrong with having your personal beliefs. Beliefs are a natural right and freedom." I responded, "I reject your relativistic viewpoint that beliefs are a freedom. "If you're an actual scientist, your beliefs are dictated by reality. "There is a certain amount of wiggle room in the truth of the evidence of how reality is, but certain truths are inalienable: * "Trump is a liar. * "Climate change is happening. * "Crypto & Web3 are going to disrupt some stuff. * "¡WAGMI!: (¡𝘞𝘦 𝘈𝘳𝘦 𝘎𝘰𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘰 𝘔𝘢𝘬𝘦 𝘐𝘵!) * "Yahweh doesn't exist." They responded, "You would have to define what you mean by 'reality'. … Yahweh not existing, is an example of a personal belief by you." To which I gave a dissertation on Kohlberg's Stages of Moral Development & why I believe my viewpoint is structurally superior to theirs. 1/?
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
δυς pfp
0 reply
1 recast
1 reaction
Yessil 🍄 pfp
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Sero pfp
0 reply
1 recast
5 reactions
Sero pfp
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction