« Recession vs inflation targeting | Main | The recession is not taking place »

November 28, 2008



If they were capable of being sceptical, would they be feminists?


Altruism is something I have a great deal of problems with. I will not bore you with the details but twice in my life I have had to make decisions that could have resulted in my own death, and I chose in the split second you get to think about what you are doing, to risk my own life in order that someone else might survive.

Now all this sounds very courageous but it was not I was just acting as I believe any other human being would do. The calculation was very simple, and it was a calculation, (these split seconds that you act in an emergency are slowed down to near action replay mode) was if I don't help or save the other persons how would I live with myself.

The trade off if you like was like someone holding a gun to your loved ones head and asking you if you would like to take their place, you do it because you do not wish to live on the gunmans terms, or in my case I did not want to live on lucks terms, IMO altruism if its anything is super egoism, I personally believe that both altruism and egoism are in fact the same thing. And you are born that way, we all are

Which if true, makes the premise of your post pseudo scinece.


Isn't there an essential further experiment? How do the "losers" behave when similar games are performed again, so that a "loser" becomes a "winner"?


"The “glass ceiling” might exist, in part, therefore because contests for status in a hierarchy favours masculine qualities."

It might be more accurate to say that "masculine qualities" make a person more interested in successfully competing for status in a hierarchy.

It is the difference between being a better runner, and trying harder to outrun something.

The comments to this entry are closed.

blogs I like

Blog powered by Typepad