Right, my claim is that there is no mechanism for switching gears, an understanding that drastic improvement is possible will never be invalidated. — Judaka

Isn't this thread supposed to be a means to invalidating that interpretation, in which case the thread itself would serve as a partial mechanism for switching gears? It seems to me that in creating this thread you have decided that the opposition is persuadable? And this is why you are trying to persuade?

I agree that the truth is crucially important, but even the most ardent effort to understand it will still leave much ambiguity. When dealing with uncertainty, ideas of risk/reward come into play, and we must decide what options work best. The risks as a culture of judging ourselves as less capable than we are in influencing our personal outcomes, and of risk that judging ourselves as more capable than we are. That is what we must juggle. — Judaka

Okay, but isn't this still a question of truth? There is an estimation of capability, and then there is a judgment as to how accurate that estimation is. As you said, we might say, "We are less capable than this estimation supposes," or, "We are more capable than this estimation supposes." Both are judgments of truth. That said, I do agree that there is a pragmatic aspect where we should err on the safe side instead of focusing exclusively on truth.

We have very similar views, and where we seem to disagree, possibly, we would agree if the nuances were laid bare. — Judaka

I imagine that's right.

True, though this is a case where a person had no control over the outcome at all. It becomes murkier when someone did ostensibly have a way to avoid the consequences of their problem or when they're actively contributing to it. You've let Bill off the hook where his parents taught him bad spending habits, whereas many wouldn't. — Judaka

Well, what I said is that we don't have enough information to conclude that Bill is necessarily at fault. More premises would be required to draw that conclusion. If Bill exacerbated his spending habits in a way that is not accountable by what his parents taught him, then he begins to assume (partial) responsibility. The same is true of the addict, who can exacerbate his addiction in a culpable manner.

But yes, I agree that in practice it is difficult to sort out questions of culpability.

Hmm, but a disease is so straightforward... — Judaka

Well the analogy limps, but I think it also sheds light. Look, in real life people really do shift from viewing things as 'fixable' to viewing them as 'unfixable', and it relates their perceived effort and perceived possibilities. Insofar as they think they have exhausted all or most possibilities, they will begin to view something as unfixable.

As for self-help, well, sometimes people are just selling hope because hope sells. — Judaka

True.

Education + changing attitudes + increasing awareness of the complexity of factors & will, changing how we perceive responsibility and blame, etc, I can agree with all of this. — Judaka

I think we are in agreement on all of the big questions.

Thanks for participating in this discussion with me. I'm impressed by your willingness to engage with such a complicated, original topic, despite it being presented suboptimally. I appreciate your effort to ensure we weren't just talking past each other.

Although I'm happy to continue discussing something if you feel it's worthwhile, and I'll let you reply to what I've said regardless, I'm pretty comfortable with where we're at. — Judaka

Thank you as well. It was a refreshing and honest discussion, not to mention interesting! It was a nice introduction to the forum for me. :smile:

And yes, I am also comfortable with where we're at. No need to reply further if you don't feel inclined.

Best,
Leontiskos