[PakG1]

An initial glance makes it seem similar to Schrödinger's cat. I do use Schrödinger's cat type thinking to make decisions and think about things when I don't know what the right answer is, so just act as if all scenarios are the right one until I know for sure which is right. I shall look into it, as well as the book. Your point in that there's not much one can do to reason oneself into or out of valuing collaboration and the opinions of others is what I find concerting, as I'm not confident I'd ever find the answer if that's truly the case. And I agree that there does seem to be psychological data that says that is indeed the case. Well, it is what it is. :)

[Nevermark]

One way to be driven to be more collaborative from a rational motivation, chosen first principle, perspective, is realize you own everything and everyone.

Because you do. The only thing you will ever really have is the reality you can impact around you. So take charge!

Your job isn't just your day job. It is to run and push the planet along a good direction as much as you can, because it is literally your planet. These are all your people.

So learn to "use" people to your best advantage by learning what makes them tick, how to communicate and motivate, how to encourage and help even the people you only see once.

Be a great world leader from the perspective that you are objectively at the center of your world and you really do have the ability to move needles. So move every one you can.

When you do consciously act to move needles forward it's very motivating and self-affirming.

Get the most good out of others and yourself for this planet you own.

[cybernautique]

Have you read Max Stirner? This is one of the most compelling motivations of egoism I've seen, and the phraseology converges almost directly with Stirner's "The Ego And Its Own."

[Nevermark]

No I had not, so thanks for the reference!

I just looked him up on Wikipedia and my first impression is he was a very original/independent thinker. :)

I came to that view unconsciously at first, before I recognized it explicitly. It never made sense to me to not care about my net impact carrying on after I die, since it is pretty clear I am going to die, and very soon relative to our home the universe.

Caring about the whole planet, and measuring my self-worth based on that, seems like the only sensible response. And it isn't in conflict with being self-interested at all, it really maximizes self-interest objectively speaking.

My impact will be all of me that survives but it will go on subtly for a very very long time! Go me, lol!

Off to Amazon to get Stirner's book.

[cybernautique]

I highly recommend reading it as a comedy, in the vein of inherently absurd shitposts. Stirner's bragadocio really underscores the absurdity of self-interest vis-a-vis the individual's standing with reality.

I very much agree with your position! I came to a similar view, which I only acknowledged in my explicit deconstruction of my beliefs. It's taken me ages to reconverge; Camus, Kierkegaard, Nietzsche, and Stirner finally gave me the confidence to declare: "fuck it, I am my impact, and I'm proud of what I do right."

It's really the most life-affirming philosophy I've found, it helps me walk the fine balance of empathy (tending to self-destruction) and self-interest (tending to dread isolationism, nihilism).

I'd love to keep a dialog as you read Stirner! Let me know if you're interested, I'll give you a line to reach me at :D

[Nevermark]

Yes - interested!

[lmm]

Well, if you want to collaborate better, maybe acknowledge to yourself that that's a goal you're deliberately pursuing and therefore you're going to sacrifice other things (probably including reaching the best possible conclusion in individual conversations) because you value good collaboration more. (Of course that only works if you really do value it more).

[cybernautique]

Keep in mind, rationalism is about "this, therefore that;" the root of rationalism is ratio, as in the multiplicity of proportions which lie between integers. Rationalist thought is "I have these guarantees, what does that mean for this context?" Try inverting it: "I want these contexts, what guarantees allow for their manifestation?"

It's also important to remember that we are animals of habit and change. Valuing collaboration is a habit; sports are a great way to build and exercise it. I'm personally very fond of rowing. There's little else that matches it for enforcing collaboration.

Last, have you ever had an interest in psychedelics? LSD lit a fuse of empathy in my skull, and a lot of this has developed naturally (but not easily nor simply) from my relationship with the absurd.

[PakG1]

This is interesting food for thought.