|
|
|
|
|
|
by zyfo
5207 days ago
|
|
|
The "Responsible, Serious and Altruistic" bit was a bit of a straw man I must admit. My point was basically that: 1) if pg doesn't have some well thought out and articulated perspective on moral questions, that's OK - he's not a priest 2) Saying it's alarming is basically pushing him and people like him into taking a (probably artificial) position for the sake of taking one. 3) Just because one is powerful doesn't mean one has to be a role model in all areas of life. This is unnecessary pressure on an individual who hasn't asked for it - he's basically a sort of VC, he isn't running for president - and I don't see anything good coming out of it. I chose a utilitarian belief system as an example because it felt like the most non-controversial one to make a point. Incidentally, I don't subscribe to it. Agreed about humanities, but I don't really see the connection to your OP. Here's a highly related essay by pg, by the way: http://www.paulgraham.com/identity.html |
|
|
Overall, I think pg was just thrown off-guard by the question and could probably come up with a more adequate answer off-stage, particularly because he has a background in philosophy. I was using him, wrongly, as an example of the technocratic tendency to not consider morality in decision-making. However, I'll continue here with a response to your objections pretending he really is a less well-rounded VC:
I think your responses are emblematic of a current societal tendency to be easy on leadership and powerful people, because they're "just human." I don't agree with that tendency to not hold leaders accountable to a higher standard, and I don't think it's right for a person with that much power to not have a clear moral position on who he or she does business with. We can all disagree on what we think is right, but I think there are many who have been led to believe that they simply can't expect more out of certain people because it's not "fair." I'm merely providing a counter-opinion to that.
About the humanities, that was said out of frustration that you/others may not have been exposed to moral frameworks outside of the traditional religious and political tie-ins. It was an incorrect sweeping generalization, but regardless, it doesn't hurt anyone to be reminded of these subjects now and again :)