[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Manipulation of a belief system at high layers can make otherwise normal person to commit immoral actions. Similar thing happened in the mind of many terrorists.

There are enough instances from psychological experiments and the recruitment of concentration camp torturers to suggest that all that is required to do things that are obviously immoral is the appearance of authority or permission.

What's obvious to you may not be obvious to them. Most of us may think that killing a terrorist is a moral action because it can save many more lives. It might happen that the recruits were told that they were facing terrorists or similar type of people who want to destroy their society.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Manipulation of a belief system at high layers can make otherwise normal person to commit immoral actions. Similar thing happened in the mind of many terrorists.

There are enough instances from psychological experiments and the recruitment of concentration camp torturers to suggest that all that is required to do things that are obviously immoral is the appearance of authority or permission.

That is incorrect the milgram experiment showed about 61% of participants were prepared to follow the lead of an authority figure compared to the 39% who would resist.   

If anything its evidence that the 60% need to be taught that it's ok to resist authority on occasion, not that the situation is helpless.

During wartime, resisting orders can get you into bad consequences. Deserters faced the risk of being executed. Wicked rulers may execute their family members as well. Its effectiveness to manipulate people's behavior may have inspired Trump to suggest punishments for family members of ISIS fighters.

[alancalverd]

It doesn't take the majority doing bad things, let alone everyone, to destroy a civilization. It only needs to pass a certain threshold, which can be very low.

One man with executive authority can demolish whatever veneer of civilisation the USA acquired over hundreds of years.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

It doesn't take the majority doing bad things, let alone everyone, to destroy a civilization. It only needs to pass a certain threshold, which can be very low.

One man with executive authority can demolish whatever veneer of civilisation the USA acquired over hundreds of years.

I've seen many pundits argued that Trump is just a symptom. The root cause is deeper and may have started for decades. The last US election shows that more than 70 million people (still) have voted for him.

[charles1948]

Could the reason 70,000,000 Americans voted for Trump,  be this:

They're fed up with people like you.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Could the reason 70,000,000 Americans voted for Trump,  be this:

They're fed up with people like you.

Can you be more specific? I'm not even an American.

[charles1948]

Could the reason 70,000,000 Americans voted for Trump,  be this:

They're fed up with people like you.

Can you be more specific? I'm not even an American.

I just want you to shut up.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

Could the reason 70,000,000 Americans voted for Trump,  be this:

They're fed up with people like you.

Can you be more specific? I'm not even an American.

I just want you to shut up.

Why is that? You can simply stop reading my posts.
Alternatively, you can just point out which part of my reasoning that you think is wrong, and how to fix it.

[charles1948]

You write so many posts, so full of ideas, that I get jealous.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

I've seen many pundits argued that Trump is just a symptom. The root cause is deeper and may have started for decades. The last US election shows that more than 70 million people (still) have voted for him.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/With_great_power_comes_great_responsibility
The Peter Parker principle suggests that people with greater power should be restricted by higher moral standard, compared to those without such power. It's depicted in my previous post.

IMO, power acquisition is just an instrumental goal. The power can provide easy access to resources by shifting the burden of hard working to other people.
They need the resources to survive,  getting pleasure and avoiding pain,  which are basic instincts shaped by evolutionary process.

In the light of universal terminal goal, the six stages above could be extended up and down to cover systems with higher as well as lower consciousness levels than average human individuals. The pattern here is that the lower the level, the more localized in space and time the causality of actions/decisions is under consideration.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

You write so many posts, so full of ideas, that I get jealous.

You made me flattered.

[alancalverd]

The Peter Parker principle

Whereas the Peter Principle

that members of a hierarchy are promoted until they reach the level at which they are no longer competent.

actually explains Trump, George W Bush and Boris Johnson.

[charles1948]

The Peter Parker principle

Whereas the Peter Principle

that members of a hierarchy are promoted until they reach the level at which they are no longer competent.

actually explains Trump, George W Bush and Boris Johnson.

Why didn't you say Barack Obama?  Is it because he was black

[alancalverd]

No, because he was competent.

[alancalverd]

The Peter Parker principle suggests that people with greater power should be restricted by higher moral standard, compared to those without such power.

Since killing people is immoral, that would prevent presidents from declaring war. But a nation is an area with a boundary that is defended by lethal force. So you are advocating a pretty significant change in the way the world is organised.

[charles1948]

No, because he was competent.

I don't believe you.  Even if he'd been the most incompetent president in the entire history of the USA,  you wouldn't have mentioned him.  That's true, isn't it?

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

My newsfeed reminds me of resource distribution and how to regulate it to achieve common goals more effectively and efficiently.
https://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2021/01/28/epic-battle-over-gamestop-as-nerds-take-on-wall-street-.html

   An epic battle is unfolding on Wall Street with a cast of characters clashing over the fate of GameStop, a struggling chain of video game retail stores.

The conflict has sent GameStop on a stomach-churning ride with amateur investors taking on the financial establishment in the mindset of the Occupy Wall Street movement launched a decade ago. 

   "It's a good reminder, though, that the stock market isn't the only measure of the health of our economy."

   Senator Elizabeth Warren also called for scrutiny.

"For years, the same hedge funds, private equity firms, and wealthy investors dismayed by the GameStop trades have treated the stock market like their own personal casino while everyone else pays the price," she said in a statement.

"It's long past time for the SEC and other financial regulators to wake up and do their jobs.."

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

you won't be able to build an interspecies moral system.

And why would I want to? The dog is my friend, the flea is our common enemy. Actually, cat fleas are more of a problem: dog fleas don't much care for human blood.

Because we don't live alone.

In case we successfully pass through some layers of the great filters and build a level 2 or 3 civilization in Kardashev scale, we are likely to find extraterrestrial lifeforms, some of which may be conscious. Even if conscious lifeforms turn out to be so rare that they are absent in entire Milky Way except earth, homo sapiens are likely to diversify into many different groups of genetic makeups, especially when genetic engineering becomes as cheap and reliable as current smartphones. With such enormous power, people can become whatever they want. The possibilities are limited only by our imaginations. At this stage, we need to identify a universal terminal goal and how to achieve it. We can't possibly solve a problem which we can't identify. It is one of fundamental concepts in process safety.
Setting up moral rules based on a universal moral standard is necessary to make sure that those enormous powers we are about to have won't be directed toward our own destruction which cause us to fail in achieving that goal.

[hamdani yusuf (OP)]

You write so many posts, so full of ideas, that I get jealous.

You made me flattered.

Almost all of the ideas I posted here were already available somewhere in the internet. I just compiled them to fit into our topic of discussions. If there's contribution I've made can be considered new, it's perhaps the identification of the universal terminal goal and consequently, the best and worst case scenario. Someone else might have come up with similar idea, although I haven't found it yet.

[alancalverd]

I don't believe you.  Even if he'd been the most incompetent president in the entire history of the USA,  you wouldn't have mentioned him.  That's true, isn't it?

I don't lie. And I don't correspond with people who pretend to know what I think. Goodbye.