|
|
|
|
|
|
by aleph_minus_one
10 days ago
|
|
|
> 1. smartphones are extremely useful (being miniature computers and all); Whether they are extremely useful or just some tool that has its uses depends a lot on your lifestyle. > 2. people tend to optimize their actions with the best tools available (i.e. smartphones in this case); What "best (tools)" means for you, depends a lot on your values. For example, if you value privacy, mobile phones and in particular smartphones are incredibly bad tool choices. |
|
|
The "useful" then didn't refer to the individual value judgments of all individuals, but the presence of material affordances that a sufficiently big mass of people would find useful. I admit this was not the best wording, but I forgot (and can't find it right now) the formal term that encapsulates the material qualities that others may see usefulness.
> What "best (tools)" means for you, depends a lot on your values. For example, if you value privacy, mobile phones and in particular smartphones are incredibly bad tool choices.
Agreed, but this misses the point. I didn't mean to imply that the value of things are objective (this is a misesian perspective, SToV is implied), but that some people would find smartphones useful, adopting themselves, and that would further expand the opportunities smartphones are useful to others, creating a positive feedback loop.