Warning: Some posts on this platform may contain adult material intended for mature audiences only. Viewer discretion is advised. By clicking ‘Continue’, you confirm that you are 18 years or older and consent to viewing explicit content.
Our understanding of the brain is still very much in an infantile state, but we are starting to understand how disorders look on brain scans. We could test people based on their reaction to situations that would come up in corruption cases.
I’ve filled out hours of test for entry level positions that never called me back. Anyone looking to get into management or politics could be tested in many ways. We choose not to develop testing for these positions.
And how do we decide through those tests who is right to lead? For example how do we ensure that these tests don’t just filter out women or POC or LGBT or people who are going to push too hard to help the people.
By testing. The only way to find out if a test is performing well is to look at the results. I wouldn’t know how to test for these things as I am neuro divergent and don’t value physical processions almost at all. I’m pretty much un-bribable, so I could never develop a test for if someone is susceptible to it. I know there was a study that found normal people feel great pride winning a game of monopoly, even when they know the game is rigged in their favor. I can’t imagine that being fun as a base line of who I am. Are there enough people out there who are immune to temptation in the way I am? No idea. But maybe we could work on some tests to find out.
Anarchist philosopher and writer Pyotr Kropotkin wrote this amazing article called “Are we good enough” and I’m going to copy paste part of it here because it’s really relevant to your point about preventing bad people from taking over
Men are not good enough for Communism, but are they good enough for Capitalism? If all men were good-hearted, kind, and just, they would never exploit one another, although possessing the means of doing so. With such men the private ownership of capital would be no danger. The capitalist would hasten to share his profits with the workers, and the best-remunerated workers with those suffering from occasional causes. If men were provident they would not produce velvet and articles of luxury while food is wanted in cottages: they would not build palaces as long as there are slums.
If men had a deeply developed feeling of equity they would not oppress other men. Politicians would not cheat their electors; Parliament would not be a chattering and cheating box, and Charles Warren’s policemen would refuse to bludgeon the Trafalgar Square talkers and listeners. And if men were gallant, self-respecting, and less egotistic, even a bad capitalist would not be a danger; the workers would have soon reduced him to the role of a simple comrade-manager. Even a King would not be dangerous, because the people would merely consider him as a fellow unable to do better work, and therefore entrusted with signing some stupid papers sent out to other cranks calling themselves Kings.
But men are not those free-minded, independent, provident, loving, and compassionate fellows which we should like to see them. And precisely, therefore, they must not continue living under the present system which permits them to oppress and exploit one another
To answer the question you presented at the end of your comment, Kropotkin says no. There is no way to prevent this and thus we must destroy the positions of power to stop men from using it to oppress others.
deleted by creator
Well, like with anything else, we need a test.
Our understanding of the brain is still very much in an infantile state, but we are starting to understand how disorders look on brain scans. We could test people based on their reaction to situations that would come up in corruption cases.
I’ve filled out hours of test for entry level positions that never called me back. Anyone looking to get into management or politics could be tested in many ways. We choose not to develop testing for these positions.
And how do we decide through those tests who is right to lead? For example how do we ensure that these tests don’t just filter out women or POC or LGBT or people who are going to push too hard to help the people.
By testing. The only way to find out if a test is performing well is to look at the results. I wouldn’t know how to test for these things as I am neuro divergent and don’t value physical processions almost at all. I’m pretty much un-bribable, so I could never develop a test for if someone is susceptible to it. I know there was a study that found normal people feel great pride winning a game of monopoly, even when they know the game is rigged in their favor. I can’t imagine that being fun as a base line of who I am. Are there enough people out there who are immune to temptation in the way I am? No idea. But maybe we could work on some tests to find out.
Anarchist philosopher and writer Pyotr Kropotkin wrote this amazing article called “Are we good enough” and I’m going to copy paste part of it here because it’s really relevant to your point about preventing bad people from taking over
To answer the question you presented at the end of your comment, Kropotkin says no. There is no way to prevent this and thus we must destroy the positions of power to stop men from using it to oppress others.
Full link to Are We Good Enough
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/petr-kropotkin-are-we-good-enough
And in video format for those who prefer to listen instead of read
https://youtube.com/watch?v=t2Al-ivn074&feature=share8