The Meaning of Strength

I have not really made any identifiable mistakes during this process.

This was the other possible outcome for the 'blame the middle class' posts. If I did not underestimate the ability of the average person, then it means I correctly judged it. I was going to say, but somehow just never got around to it, that one of the songs I linked which was meant to be in the memory of someone who had 'died' could be seen as referring to the me with limited potential.

This is important when it comes to people mentioned in a previous post. If I had made a mistake, such as incorrectly judging the ability of other people, you could say the Person A or Person B in that post are not interested in me, and that they would be happy without me. Theoretically it would possible for me to then end up with just one other person. However due to past events it would also mean that whoever I ended up with had also made a mistake, or that I am so severely unable to understand reality that I am unable to avoid concluding that they had made a mistake when it was not actually the case.

So I am forced to conclude that if I live, I will be with at least two other people since otherwise I wouldn't be able to think they're happy. It then becomes necessary to look at why culturally this is not encouraged within most societies.

Part of the reason is definitely economic—when it comes to "marriage", it is much more common for a male to have multiple female partners than for a female to have multiple male partners. Since males have traditionally been seen as the primary source of paid work in Western culture for the last few centuries, a male person generally has to have significantly higher income than average to have more than one female partner, and this generally means not using the strategy of offering low prices. To the extent that selling at a high price is seen as "greedy", the attitude that multiple female partners is wrong is a way to discourage selling at high prices.

To the extent that the idea on this site would make it unnecessary to feel morally obligated to offer low prices, it would also remove the economic rationale behind the discouragement of multiple female partners.

(It would also remove the wage premium for work which people might see as "unethical", while maybe also allowing changes in the legal status of prostitution and so on. As an earlier post pointed out, it becomes easier to trust people when everyone has other reasonable options that allow them to avoid doing things which others see as harmful in some way. Lack of opportunities are a major reason behind illegal activities of all types, but this could also include not having an option to earn a "fair" amount of income for work done. Earning closer to average income can be a way to gain more self-respect (this isn't the blog I remember reading once), but this wouldn't be a problem if the idea on this site were used. /endtangent)


...what was I talking about. Oh, so last year I didn't want to imply I felt that this idea was important for people to use. I did want to find someone who I felt was as smart as me who would have the same chance of getting people to use it.

However, I did not find anyone I felt matched that description. This seemed to result in conflict, precisely because of the possible time cost of trying to get people to support this idea. I mentioned Person B before but the problem's origins were earlier than that. It seemed like it might be possible for Person A to blame herself for the first time I failed the Japanese language test because she had asked that I be online more. But then it seemed like Person B might blame herself for the second time I failed it because of certain actions which may have caused me to avoid using auditory study material for much of the time that I was ostensibly studying Japanese language. This would not have been a problem though if Person A had reacted differently to learning that I had failed the Japanese language test a second time. But for those reasons I felt I had to make it clear that I considered it the result of my own decisions.

The idea on this site threatened that idea by reducing the time I would theoretically have had available to study the Japanese language. If I had spent more effort and people used the idea as a result, my lack of educational credentials would no longer have been an excuse and I might have ended up with Person B, and Person A might have felt it was her fault for influencing my behavior in a way that she could have felt contributed to me failing the Japanese language test the first time, and that my inability to prevent that outcome meant I didn't care about her. As it turned out I failed it a third time but no one could have said it was anything but the result of my own decisions.

So I have spent an equivalent amount of effort and learned about as much during the past several months as I would have if I had seriously tried to get people to use the idea last year. I don't think the time spent is as important though as the conclusion that "stupidity" is an accurate explanation for why problems exist in society at this time.

I don't think I would be in my current situation if I had found someone last year who could understand the idea on this site, or if I had been able to avoid conflict between the observed reality that I had not found such a person and my previous goals. In this sense, the uncertainties of my physical security represent a possible loss for Persons A and B resulting from the specific level of capabilities of people who were aware of this idea last year which prevented them from comprehending it or having confidence in its benefit to the world.