You are teaching your nephews to be greedy and to value individual ambition over everything else. In other words, encouraging them to internalize the values of the society in which they live.
This is not very bold or novel, but rather ordinary.
Given all the problems that are coming to light in societies that have have taken individualism to absurd and self-defeating extremes, this is exactly the opposite of what is required if these places are to avoid collapsing into failed states, technocratic dictatorships or banana republics run by and for delusional oligarchs.
I liked the post overall, but story # 1, taken to an extreme is basically lottery tickets.
I understand that this was for the OP's nephews, but to actually apply it in practice, you need at least a rough sense of expected value, whether the "games" are iterated or one-shot, and opportunity costs.
For story 1, the expected value of game 2 is like $100,000. A kid might not be able to calculate it, but it's obviously a good deal. So obvious that, when the bad part of the story is that other people think you're dumb, it just comes across that your detractors are then dumb ones because it's obviously a good decision. It's awkwardly trying to mix a lesson about shrugging off irrelevant social consequences with a lesson about expected outcome being different than the most likely outcome.
Story 2... I just don't think the premise is all that interesting. As a former high school track captain who didn't work all that hard to get there, I'd think it was vastly more impressive to give a speech at the United Nations. The lesson is fine, but the reasoning feels weak.
8 comments
[ 7.8 ms ] story [ 1136 ms ] threadThis is not very bold or novel, but rather ordinary.
Given all the problems that are coming to light in societies that have have taken individualism to absurd and self-defeating extremes, this is exactly the opposite of what is required if these places are to avoid collapsing into failed states, technocratic dictatorships or banana republics run by and for delusional oligarchs.
I understand that this was for the OP's nephews, but to actually apply it in practice, you need at least a rough sense of expected value, whether the "games" are iterated or one-shot, and opportunity costs.
For story 1, the expected value of game 2 is like $100,000. A kid might not be able to calculate it, but it's obviously a good deal. So obvious that, when the bad part of the story is that other people think you're dumb, it just comes across that your detractors are then dumb ones because it's obviously a good decision. It's awkwardly trying to mix a lesson about shrugging off irrelevant social consequences with a lesson about expected outcome being different than the most likely outcome.
Story 2... I just don't think the premise is all that interesting. As a former high school track captain who didn't work all that hard to get there, I'd think it was vastly more impressive to give a speech at the United Nations. The lesson is fine, but the reasoning feels weak.