Total Posts:32|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Money or 'ideals'?

Cermank
Posts: 3,773
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2013 8:51:20 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
You have two options: Take a job in a field you have no interest in and get money (lots and lots of it) or take up a job in a sector that you feel is morally superior, and would give you moral satisfaction, even if it gives you lower pay.

Which one would you chose?
Eitan_Zohar
Posts: 2,697
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2013 9:02:35 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
The former. I'd rather be an Fortune 500 executive than a veterinarian, especially since that the amount of money I 'd be making would enable me to do more good anyway.
"It is my ambition to say in ten sentences what others say in a whole book."
Cermank
Posts: 3,773
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2013 9:10:39 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/25/2013 9:02:35 AM, Eitan_Zohar wrote:
The former. I'd rather be an Fortune 500 executive than a veterinarian, especially since that the amount of money I 'd be making would enable me to do more good anyway.

Even if you have no interest in the job? The caveat is that the former job is boring to you.
lewis20
Posts: 5,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2013 9:16:58 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/25/2013 9:02:35 AM, Eitan_Zohar wrote:
The former. I'd rather be an Fortune 500 executive than a veterinarian, especially since that the amount of money I 'd be making would enable me to do more good anyway.

Ya you'd be absolutely miserable working 80 hours a week and veterinarians make a fairly substantial amount of money.
"If you are a racist I will attack you with the north"- Abraham Lincoln

"Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material" - Leviticus 19 19

"War is a racket" - Smedley Butler
lewis20
Posts: 5,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2013 11:27:00 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Wouldn't a better question be which one you would pursue? Guaranteeing one or the other doesn't take into account risk of accomplishing neither.
"If you are a racist I will attack you with the north"- Abraham Lincoln

"Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material" - Leviticus 19 19

"War is a racket" - Smedley Butler
YYW
Posts: 36,355
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2013 12:15:43 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/25/2013 8:51:20 AM, Cermank wrote:
You have two options: Take a job in a field you have no interest in and get money (lots and lots of it) or take up a job in a sector that you feel is morally superior, and would give you moral satisfaction, even if it gives you lower pay.

Which one would you chose?

The former, until I had enough cash to live comfortably on the salary of the latter, which I would then take after establishing financial security.
Tsar of DDO
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2013 12:16:49 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
depends on what the money is. I'd like to make more money then the average person in the US, but I don't have a desire for money except for social status purposes.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
YYW
Posts: 36,355
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2013 12:20:20 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/25/2013 12:16:49 PM, darkkermit wrote:
depends on what the money is. I'd like to make more money then the average person in the US, but I don't have a desire for money except for social status purposes.

I'd like to be able to afford a weekend home with a dock and a boat in Maine, but that's more for my own pleasure than for status.
Tsar of DDO
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2013 12:22:53 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Latter.
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
Cermank
Posts: 3,773
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2013 12:46:06 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I don't understand the lure of working at a job that would be boring to me. Considering we essentially chose our jobs, why chose to work at a place that would suck out life from you, even if it pays well? There's no benefit of that increased pay then, you'll basically use the money to fill that void in your life- which was a result of the very job you took.
R0b1Billion
Posts: 3,733
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2013 12:50:04 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/25/2013 8:51:20 AM, Cermank wrote:
You have two options: Take a job in a field you have no interest in and get money (lots and lots of it) or take up a job in a sector that you feel is morally superior, and would give you moral satisfaction, even if it gives you lower pay.

Which one would you chose?

I would choose the latter, because morality is more effective at creating happiness than money is.
Beliefs in a nutshell:
- The Ends never justify the Means.
- Objectivity is secondary to subjectivity.
- The War on Drugs is the worst policy in the U.S.
- Most people worship technology as a religion.
- Computers will never become sentient.
R0b1Billion
Posts: 3,733
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2013 1:10:48 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/25/2013 9:02:35 AM, Eitan_Zohar wrote:
The former. I'd rather be an Fortune 500 executive than a veterinarian, especially since that the amount of money I 'd be making would enable me to do more good anyway.

That is illogical. The practicality surrounding such a position would require lots of things that I don't think you understand. First of all, these positions are dog-eat-dog. By the time you achieve this position, you would have already sold your soul and any moral sense you had left would be buried under many layers of denial and justification for the things you had to do to get there. The money you earn afterwards is the only consolation for the endless hours of dedication to the profession, sniveling to your superiors to get ahead, loss of time with family/exercise/hobbies etc., and buying luxuries will be the only way you can justify the sacrifices you have made. Furthermore, just having the money in the first place requires moral sacrifice. Being rich means you constantly have to stave off efforts from others to take the money you have, and it turns you cold. Do you have any idea how many people want donations and hand-outs from you when you have money? My boss owns a little bakery and even she has people at her door constantly... People have brothers dying of cancer, help the children on their trip, help the church do this and that... And all your friends, assuming you don't trade them in for rich ones, will want you to pay for any and everything you do with them. Family gettogether? Guess who's paying! Jesus said that it's easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than it is for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God, and if you skip over the metaphysical BS, you can see that he knew a lot more about being a fortune 500 CEO than you do! ;)
Beliefs in a nutshell:
- The Ends never justify the Means.
- Objectivity is secondary to subjectivity.
- The War on Drugs is the worst policy in the U.S.
- Most people worship technology as a religion.
- Computers will never become sentient.
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2013 1:15:17 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/25/2013 12:46:06 PM, Cermank wrote:
I don't understand the lure of working at a job that would be boring to me. Considering we essentially chose our jobs, why chose to work at a place that would suck out life from you, even if it pays well? There's no benefit of that increased pay then, you'll basically use the money to fill that void in your life- which was a result of the very job you took.

That's the difference between men and women. Women work for self-actualization and perks and benefits of the job. Men work more for money. Women desire a man w/ money, they don't need to work to obtain that, they just need to find the right guy.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
Cermank
Posts: 3,773
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2013 1:23:01 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/25/2013 1:10:48 PM, R0b1Billion wrote:
At 8/25/2013 9:02:35 AM, Eitan_Zohar wrote:
The former. I'd rather be an Fortune 500 executive than a veterinarian, especially since that the amount of money I 'd be making would enable me to do more good anyway.

That is illogical. The practicality surrounding such a position would require lots of things that I don't think you understand. First of all, these positions are dog-eat-dog. By the time you achieve this position, you would have already sold your soul and any moral sense you had left would be buried under many layers of denial and justification for the things you had to do to get there. The money you earn afterwards is the only consolation for the endless hours of dedication to the profession, sniveling to your superiors to get ahead, loss of time with family/exercise/hobbies etc., and buying luxuries will be the only way you can justify the sacrifices you have made. Furthermore, just having the money in the first place requires moral sacrifice. Being rich means you constantly have to stave off efforts from others to take the money you have, and it turns you cold. Do you have any idea how many people want donations and hand-outs from you when you have money? My boss owns a little bakery and even she has people at her door constantly... People have brothers dying of cancer, help the children on their trip, help the church do this and that... And all your friends, assuming you don't trade them in for rich ones, will want you to pay for any and everything you do with them. Family gettogether? Guess who's paying! Jesus said that it's easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than it is for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God, and if you skip over the metaphysical BS, you can see that he knew a lot more about being a fortune 500 CEO than you do! ;)

A more interesting proposition for you Rob. What if you had a choice between chosing to work for fortune 500, and a position where you'll be serving people directly. You'll help a great lot of people, you have job security. But you have no personal security/ privacy. You'll be transferred a lot, depending on who you piss off while helping the people, there would be high job stress. Almost no personal life. Which one would you choose?
Cermank
Posts: 3,773
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2013 1:27:19 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/25/2013 1:15:17 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 8/25/2013 12:46:06 PM, Cermank wrote:
I don't understand the lure of working at a job that would be boring to me. Considering we essentially chose our jobs, why chose to work at a place that would suck out life from you, even if it pays well? There's no benefit of that increased pay then, you'll basically use the money to fill that void in your life- which was a result of the very job you took.

That's the difference between men and women. Women work for self-actualization and perks and benefits of the job. Men work more for money. Women desire a man w/ money, they don't need to work to obtain that, they just need to find the right guy.

That's kind of true, sadly. But a man who hates his job would be frustrating to live with, tbh.
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2013 1:35:30 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/25/2013 1:27:19 PM, Cermank wrote:
At 8/25/2013 1:15:17 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 8/25/2013 12:46:06 PM, Cermank wrote:
I don't understand the lure of working at a job that would be boring to me. Considering we essentially chose our jobs, why chose to work at a place that would suck out life from you, even if it pays well? There's no benefit of that increased pay then, you'll basically use the money to fill that void in your life- which was a result of the very job you took.

That's the difference between men and women. Women work for self-actualization and perks and benefits of the job. Men work more for money. Women desire a man w/ money, they don't need to work to obtain that, they just need to find the right guy.

That's kind of true, sadly. But a man who hates his job would be frustrating to live with, tbh.

but so would a poor broke person. For the most part, unless the man was constantly bitching about his job, i don't see what the problem would be.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
Cermank
Posts: 3,773
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2013 1:47:28 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/25/2013 1:35:30 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 8/25/2013 1:27:19 PM, Cermank wrote:
At 8/25/2013 1:15:17 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 8/25/2013 12:46:06 PM, Cermank wrote:
I don't understand the lure of working at a job that would be boring to me. Considering we essentially chose our jobs, why chose to work at a place that would suck out life from you, even if it pays well? There's no benefit of that increased pay then, you'll basically use the money to fill that void in your life- which was a result of the very job you took.

That's the difference between men and women. Women work for self-actualization and perks and benefits of the job. Men work more for money. Women desire a man w/ money, they don't need to work to obtain that, they just need to find the right guy.

That's kind of true, sadly. But a man who hates his job would be frustrating to live with, tbh.

but so would a poor broke person. For the most part, unless the man was constantly bitching about his job, i don't see what the problem would be.

Because who you work for usually has a pretty important impact on how you interact with people. If you're working for someone with a opposing philosophy ( dog eat dog world, and you prefer quite), one would either change his/her behaviour with people, or would be stuck in a middle position trying to please everyone. Both of which would negatively impact personal relations.
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2013 1:52:36 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/25/2013 1:47:28 PM, Cermank wrote:
At 8/25/2013 1:35:30 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 8/25/2013 1:27:19 PM, Cermank wrote:
At 8/25/2013 1:15:17 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 8/25/2013 12:46:06 PM, Cermank wrote:
I don't understand the lure of working at a job that would be boring to me. Considering we essentially chose our jobs, why chose to work at a place that would suck out life from you, even if it pays well? There's no benefit of that increased pay then, you'll basically use the money to fill that void in your life- which was a result of the very job you took.

That's the difference between men and women. Women work for self-actualization and perks and benefits of the job. Men work more for money. Women desire a man w/ money, they don't need to work to obtain that, they just need to find the right guy.

That's kind of true, sadly. But a man who hates his job would be frustrating to live with, tbh.

but so would a poor broke person. For the most part, unless the man was constantly bitching about his job, i don't see what the problem would be.

Because who you work for usually has a pretty important impact on how you interact with people. If you're working for someone with a opposing philosophy ( dog eat dog world, and you prefer quite), one would either change his/her behaviour with people, or would be stuck in a middle position trying to please everyone. Both of which would negatively impact personal relations.

a) Considering that men are more likely to have a more dog eats dog worldview then females, and evolution would suggest that traits are selected to survive and reproduce, this suggests that women prefer men with a more dog eats dog view.
b) don't know what you mean by middle position trying to please everyone.
c) your interactions with people change based on who that person is. You act differently in front of your parents then your friends.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
R0b1Billion
Posts: 3,733
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2013 2:42:46 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
A more interesting proposition for you Rob. What if you had a choice between choosing to work for fortune 500, and a position where you'll be serving people directly. You'll help a great lot of people, you have job security. But you have no personal security/ privacy. You'll be transferred a lot, depending on who you piss off while helping the people, there would be high job stress. Almost no personal life. Which one would you choose?

Helping people = good

job security = unnecessary. I work for peanuts at the moment so I already exist in a place where job security is moot, and if I got a job where I had to worry about losing it then I'd only be weakening myself. Jesus said to give away all your possessions and your nest egg and have faith that you will be fine without the "security" that we normally speak of.

Personal security/privacy - I'm not sure I completely understand - example? Am I in some sort of acutely dangerous profession or something? I've never had a high need for privacy, and if you've seen some of the personal threads I've made on DDO you'd understand that ;)

Transferred a lot - I have a daughter in Green Bay so I really have no ability to be transferred anywhere.

High job stress - I'd never deal with that, as I am not socially conditioned enough to put up with it. I'll lay down my tools and walk out of any job that damaging me psychologically.

Personal life - I see you are trying to determine just how far I would go to "help people" and I have to say that I don't believe that helping people and helping myself are mutually exclusive. That's part of my faith, that there is a correct path to take in which I help myself as well as others. That path starts with helping others, and then if you have enough faith and dedication to that path, you will discover that you yourself are benefited by helping others. So I disagree with your entire notion that I'd have to endure a high-stress and overall crappy lifestyle just to make some personal sacrifice to help others
Beliefs in a nutshell:
- The Ends never justify the Means.
- Objectivity is secondary to subjectivity.
- The War on Drugs is the worst policy in the U.S.
- Most people worship technology as a religion.
- Computers will never become sentient.
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2013 3:39:55 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I'm starting down that course next month having already achieved qualifications that would net me a fortune.
AnDoctuir
Posts: 11,060
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2013 3:42:20 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/25/2013 3:39:55 PM, AnDoctuir wrote:
I'm starting down that course next month having already achieved qualifications that would net me a fortune.

and references, mind you.
Eitan_Zohar
Posts: 2,697
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2013 5:24:33 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/25/2013 1:10:48 PM, R0b1Billion wrote:
At 8/25/2013 9:02:35 AM, Eitan_Zohar wrote:
The former. I'd rather be an Fortune 500 executive than a veterinarian, especially since that the amount of money I 'd be making would enable me to do more good anyway.

That is illogical. The practicality surrounding such a position would require lots of things that I don't think you understand. First of all, these positions are dog-eat-dog. By the time you achieve this position, you would have already sold your soul and any moral sense you had left would be buried under many layers of denial and justification for the things you had to do to get there. The money you earn afterwards is the only consolation for the endless hours of dedication to the profession, sniveling to your superiors to get ahead, loss of time with family/exercise/hobbies etc., and buying luxuries will be the only way you can justify the sacrifices you have made. Furthermore, just having the money in the first place requires moral sacrifice. Being rich means you constantly have to stave off efforts from others to take the money you have, and it turns you cold. Do you have any idea how many people want donations and hand-outs from you when you have money? My boss owns a little bakery and even she has people at her door constantly... People have brothers dying of cancer, help the children on their trip, help the church do this and that... And all your friends, assuming you don't trade them in for rich ones, will want you to pay for any and everything you do with them. Family gettogether? Guess who's paying! Jesus said that it's easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than it is for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God, and if you skip over the metaphysical BS, you can see that he knew a lot more about being a fortune 500 CEO than you do! ;)

I'm very Machiavellian, personally. I don't think that I would ever hesitate to accomplish my goals, and I probably wouldn't stay there my entire life anyway, like what YYW said. And in real life I can't imagine ever being anything other than a scholar, so it's really not something that concerns me. Academia is the only thing I'll go into.
"It is my ambition to say in ten sentences what others say in a whole book."
wrichcirw
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/25/2013 5:42:48 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/25/2013 8:51:20 AM, Cermank wrote:
You have two options: Take a job in a field you have no interest in and get money (lots and lots of it) or take up a job in a sector that you feel is morally superior, and would give you moral satisfaction, even if it gives you lower pay.

Which one would you chose?

If you take the former, it is because you have a lot of interest in getting lots and lots of money. Therefore, it would follow that you develop interest in the field.

To others, money is not that important, so they'd rather do something that they enjoy doing, which for them is irrelevant to money.

I think a better question is to ask whether or not you'd do a job that earns a ton of money that you feel is morally abhorrent - that to me is the more relevant issue...does the money compensate for your disgust in your field?
At 8/9/2013 9:41:24 AM, wrichcirw wrote:
If you are civil with me, I will be civil to you. If you decide to bring unreasonable animosity to bear in a reasonable discussion, then what would you expect other than to get flustered?
Andromeda_Z
Posts: 4,151
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/28/2013 10:11:52 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
The first. I'd really love the money, I've had more than enough of being broke. I can always pursue interesting things in my free time with the excess money from working a high-paying job.
Buddamoose
Posts: 19,450
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/28/2013 10:53:55 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
If you could have Bill Gates fortune, or end hunger and instill World Peace, what color would your lamborghini be?
"Reality is an illusion created due to a lack of alcohol"
-Airmax1227

"You were the moon all this time, and he was always there to make you shine."

"Was he the sun?"

"No honey, he was the darkness"

-Kazekirion
Andromeda_Z
Posts: 4,151
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/28/2013 11:14:39 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/28/2013 10:53:55 PM, Buddamoose wrote:
If you could have Bill Gates fortune, or end hunger and instill World Peace, what color would your lamborghini be?

Fvck that, I want a classic Camaro in black and red. And I could still do quite a bit with all the leftover money because wow that's a lot of money. It'd be less than pocket lint to buy food and water for some starving people.
Andromeda_Z
Posts: 4,151
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/28/2013 11:17:57 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 8/25/2013 5:24:33 PM, Eitan_Zohar wrote:
At 8/25/2013 1:10:48 PM, R0b1Billion wrote:
At 8/25/2013 9:02:35 AM, Eitan_Zohar wrote:
The former. I'd rather be an Fortune 500 executive than a veterinarian, especially since that the amount of money I 'd be making would enable me to do more good anyway.

That is illogical. The practicality surrounding such a position would require lots of things that I don't think you understand. First of all, these positions are dog-eat-dog. By the time you achieve this position, you would have already sold your soul and any moral sense you had left would be buried under many layers of denial and justification for the things you had to do to get there. The money you earn afterwards is the only consolation for the endless hours of dedication to the profession, sniveling to your superiors to get ahead, loss of time with family/exercise/hobbies etc., and buying luxuries will be the only way you can justify the sacrifices you have made. Furthermore, just having the money in the first place requires moral sacrifice. Being rich means you constantly have to stave off efforts from others to take the money you have, and it turns you cold. Do you have any idea how many people want donations and hand-outs from you when you have money? My boss owns a little bakery and even she has people at her door constantly... People have brothers dying of cancer, help the children on their trip, help the church do this and that... And all your friends, assuming you don't trade them in for rich ones, will want you to pay for any and everything you do with them. Family gettogether? Guess who's paying! Jesus said that it's easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than it is for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God, and if you skip over the metaphysical BS, you can see that he knew a lot more about being a fortune 500 CEO than you do! ;)

I'm very Machiavellian, personally. I don't think that I would ever hesitate to accomplish my goals, and I probably wouldn't stay there my entire life anyway, like what YYW said. And in real life I can't imagine ever being anything other than a scholar, so it's really not something that concerns me. Academia is the only thing I'll go into.

And if you don't think academia is dog-eat-dog, you have much to learn about life.