[tsimionescu]

I think the biggest issue is that for the system to succeed, most participants need to display the first list of traits. But for any individual within the system, personal success may be easier to obtain by displaying the second set (though that is not necessarily true, in my experience).

[wppick]

It's like the person in the sportscar weaving through traffic on the highway. He can only do it because everyone else drives carefully and predictably. He gets to his destination faster, and thinks he is a much better driver than everyone else, but if everyone drove like him the traffic "system" would fall apart. The master mindset is sacrificing the well working system for personal gain. If you want to go fast go alone. If you want to go far go together. What's not good for the hive is not good for the bee.

[dvdhnt]

A few years ago, I did a bit of research into how social programs in Scandinavia were able to take root. My initial hypothesis was - they must be more selfless than a traditional American, so let me find what makes that so.

However, after doing my anecdotal reading, I came away with the belief they are just as, if not more, selfish than Americans, but Swedes for example, are able to support programs because they understand they might need them at some point.

That took me back to another common quote, that Americans see themselves not as poor but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires.

Again, all anecdotal.

[devmunchies]

>most participants need to display the first list of traits

That's exactly how it is. Those with a slave morality are controlled, guided, and protected by those with a master morality to keep society running.

A society of masters moralities will eventually develop a pecking order and will recalibrate itself.

[defertoreptar]

Egoism frames this in such a way where the second set of "bad" traits are the authentic human traits, namely self-interest. The "good" traits are then secondary, a means to an end. E.g. we are honest and don't steal because the legal and social consequences are not worth it. We see the path to a life where we best get what we want as the one where we cooperate with others. This could explain Adam Smith's "invisible hand" of markets, where everyone acts in their own self-interest, but the whole prospers as a result.