On Intent

Consider the following experiment:

There are two people, Adam and Steve. Adam is given $10 and told to divide the money between himself and Steve. Adam has to give each person a minimum of $1. After he finishes dividing, Steve can choose whether to accept or reject the division. If the Steve rejects, no one gets any money.

Let's say you're Steve, and Adam has partitioned the money so that he will get $9, and you will get $1. What would you do?

In psychology, "rational choice theory" (RCT) is a model of human behavior that says people do things to maximize their own benefit and minimize their own cost. According to RCT, the most rational way for Adam to act is to give himself $9 and Steve $1. This gives him the most benefit. The most rational way for Steve to act is to accept whatever offer Adam gives, because he gets money that way. There is absolutely no cost to these actions by Adam or Steve.

This experiment was actually done, and for the Steves who were offered $1, 30% of them rejected it. This is very interesting to me, because it shows that people are often not perfectly rational actors.

Let's say you had a one-time use button which, when you pressed it, would give you $1, and the experiment was to see whether you'd press that button. Of course you would! Now, let's say that when you press the button, you get $1, and a random stranger receives $9. Would you still press it? I'm going to venture "yes". It's free money.

The difference between the button and the experiment is intent. In the button example, no intent exists. The button is a lifeless thing, a means to an end. Press it and two people get money. But if the button is a person who willingly chose to only give himself more money than you, you are more inclined to hurt him back. Notice how the results of pressing the button and accepting the deal are exactly the same: two people get money. There is no cost. However, with intent added in, everything changes.

This is the same reason first degree murder is more severely punished than manslaughter (although, sidenote: To me, "manslaughter" always sounds way worse than "murder"): Intent. Even though the result is the same (the loss of a life), the intent changes everything.

Intend good things, and don't forget to appreciate the blueness of the sky.

-Me

Just Go Ahead And Don't Read This One

Idea: It's like gum, but bitter. Bitter gum, to remind us of the plight of the proletariat.
Name ideas:
"Juicy Fruits of our labor"
"Stride forward and embrace the revolution"
"Big Red, like our ideal state" (Credit goes to my friend Steven for that one. In related news, it's also the best one.)

Chinese teenagers curse. A lot. I mean they curse so much it's like a verbal tic. Seriously, I still don't think you grasp what it's like. I'm talking almost every other word being "fuck". It's grating and awful to listen to. My roommate couldn't stand it and so terminated a friendship because of it today, which I thought was slightly drastic, but understandable. Here is a sample conversation (translated from Mandarin to English):

A: "Fuck"
B: "Fuck you"
A: "Fucking shitty"
B: "Motherfucker fuck"
A: "Fuck"
B: "Fuck"
A: "Shitty"

So yeah, not exactly gripping dialogue here.

I have no idea why this is the case. I wish it weren't. The cursing is almost surreal, like I've become trapped in an SNL parody skit of teenagers. Except it's not funny.

-Me

On Django Unchained

I recently watched Django Unchained. Here're my thoughts, which are poorly written (I have no idea how to write movie reviews):

The movie is all about escapism. Watching Django, a slave, straight up murder everyone perpetuating the institution of slavery,  is a lot of fun. Django is an unkillable, remorseless, quick-drawing sniper who, upon picking up a rifle, is somehow immediately capable of shooting a moving target several hundred feet away from him. His companion Dr. Scholtz remarks that he is a "natural", but then subjects him to a training montage anyway.

Watching the Scholtz/Django dynamic duo slaughter their way to fortune and justice was a cathartic romp of a good time. Outlaws and slaveowners are gunned down with no effort and all the moral high ground you can imagine. I've never felt this good about seeing faceless mooks explode into blood and gore. I think this is the only action movie I've watched that's made me laugh with the awesomeness of its shootouts. The two men are demigods, and I like that. It's ridiculous in a good way.

The brutality of the reality of slavery made me cringe, which is exactly what a slavery movie should make me do. This movie taught me what mandingo fighting was. It's absolutely disgusting to think that mandingo fighting not only existed at one point, but was somehow normal to people. The mandingo fight scene, the man getting torn apart by dogs, the variety of whipping scenes, and the "hot box" all made me gag. Good! Spare no expense depicting the evil of slavery.

Candie (I forgot his first name) is an interesting character in that he uses that pseudoscience of "phrenology" to justify the status quo. In reality, it's his slave, Steven, that actually figures things out. Steven seems to run the farm. He controls the slaves, which is why he hates Django. Django represents a threat to everything Steven worked so hard to build for himself. Steven is a despicable character, but only if the institution forcing him to act this way isn't also despicable.

Django Unchained is fun, it's escapism, and it's a good reminder of a dark chapter in American history. I liked it.

-Me

On Swallowing Pride

Here're the words that have been bouncing around in my head lately: Swallow your pride.

Everyone I've ever seen -- every janitor, every cashier, every homeless guy muttering to himself -- knows countless things I do not know, has had experiences I can not even imagine, has felt things I have never felt before. I have no doubt that there have and will be people who will experience a depth of happiness I will never experience, shoulder tragedies that would destroy me, fall more deeply in love, and so on.

Every thought I've ever had has in all likelihood been thought by someone else, and not just that, but thought more clearly and with more elegance. Noam Chomsky can articulate the injustices of the world better than thoughts about these injustices can even form in my mind. The same could be said about any subject ever: There will always be many people who can say things about their area of expertise better than I can even think them.

This is amazing. It's amazing to think that, whenever I am in the presence of a stranger, I am in the presence of someone who can teach me something. And I am in the presence of strangers all the time. In fact, there are millions of strangers briefly coexisting all around the world, their lives intersecting for just a moment, a moment filled with possibility.

-Me