This reminded me instantly of the UK National Lottery's slogan: 'you've got to be in it to win it'. Yes! The path is there. But personally I'm with Anthony Trollope that 'a lottery is a tax on stupidity'. And, to be honest, I'm slightly shocked that Paul even satirically allows himself to appear to promote the lottery.
This strikes me as similar to the way that making a to-do list, or praying, or writing about your future are effective tools for motivation. In articulating the path to the goal, what it is that you should do next becomes clearer, and you are more sure of the relationship between doing those things and ultimately succeeding.
This reminds me of alt-history, or counterfactual history. (I've got "What If," "What If 2," and a third volume specific to American history.)
There, the "path," or per the second idea, the "constrained path" is pretty simple, and of two parts. Only one major counterfactual is allowed, and no time travel, whether of people or objects. (The classic example is you can't give Bobby Lee machine guns at Gettysburg.)
Without those constraints, counterfactual history would go all over the place.
With them, it can be a good way to show how Santayana's dictum about not learning from history is a way to play out learning by thinking of history's contingency.
The path thing is interesting and plausible. Especially the bounded part. Also because that allows for a better preference reveal to others. That's why three wishes questions usually say "world peace, hunger and cancer are not in scope". And allows for diversification: that's why Desert Island Discs give you complete Shakespeare and the Bible or another holy scripture, because otherwise too many people would choose those.
But the lottery thing is better! I never could understand why economic principles get applied to LEISURE activity. For most gamblers (leaving aside pros and addicts) gambling seems to be ENTERTAINMENT. Lottery is not a tax on stupidity, it's a price put on specific kinds of thrill that a flutter can reliably generate. A winning is a bonus.
This reminded me instantly of the UK National Lottery's slogan: 'you've got to be in it to win it'. Yes! The path is there. But personally I'm with Anthony Trollope that 'a lottery is a tax on stupidity'. And, to be honest, I'm slightly shocked that Paul even satirically allows himself to appear to promote the lottery.
This strikes me as similar to the way that making a to-do list, or praying, or writing about your future are effective tools for motivation. In articulating the path to the goal, what it is that you should do next becomes clearer, and you are more sure of the relationship between doing those things and ultimately succeeding.
This reminds me of alt-history, or counterfactual history. (I've got "What If," "What If 2," and a third volume specific to American history.)
There, the "path," or per the second idea, the "constrained path" is pretty simple, and of two parts. Only one major counterfactual is allowed, and no time travel, whether of people or objects. (The classic example is you can't give Bobby Lee machine guns at Gettysburg.)
Without those constraints, counterfactual history would go all over the place.
With them, it can be a good way to show how Santayana's dictum about not learning from history is a way to play out learning by thinking of history's contingency.
Perhaps, but the lottery ticket trades on a deeper psychological deceit: that acquiring the means of utility will make us happy. But it won't.
Possibly of interest accordingly:
https://www.paulsagar.com/_files/ugd/ec3ee6_1c272d452d444a40a7422f5d40cf8704.docx?dn=How%20to%20be%20Happy%20-%20Sagar%20-%20Smithean%20Mind.docx
The path thing is interesting and plausible. Especially the bounded part. Also because that allows for a better preference reveal to others. That's why three wishes questions usually say "world peace, hunger and cancer are not in scope". And allows for diversification: that's why Desert Island Discs give you complete Shakespeare and the Bible or another holy scripture, because otherwise too many people would choose those.
But the lottery thing is better! I never could understand why economic principles get applied to LEISURE activity. For most gamblers (leaving aside pros and addicts) gambling seems to be ENTERTAINMENT. Lottery is not a tax on stupidity, it's a price put on specific kinds of thrill that a flutter can reliably generate. A winning is a bonus.
My new fantasy is saving Paul Bloom from assassination and he is so grateful I get a free subscription to Small Potatoes for a year.