Volconvo is a debate forum for the discussion of political, religious, and news-based topics.

castille · Jan 25, 2004, 11:42 am

You argue excessiveness is greed....

So if I am really kind, I am greedy?

Man Against Time · Jan 25, 2004, 11:50 am

No, I said abandonment of concern for how one acquires excess is greedy.

Impenitent · Jan 26, 2004, 12:32 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Man Against Time,)
No, I said abandonment of concern for how one acquires excess is greedy.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

abandonment of concern is maybe immoral or unethical... it isn't greedy

and then your abandonment of concern only is immoral or unethical if you adhere to specific ethical or moral standards...

Man Against Time · Jan 26, 2004, 07:57 am

...which everyone does except sociopaths, once you weed through the semantic bullshit that pseudo-thinkers like to pile on in hopes of attaching their name to a given thinking, no matter how false or stupid.

Leopard · Jan 26, 2004, 01:06 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Man Against Time,)
No, I said abandonment of concern for how one acquires excess is greedy.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

ok, after thinking about it for awhile, I agree with this definition, at least it is usable.

Mr. Against TIme, twice now you have made reference to 'semantic bullshit that pseudo-thinkers like to pile on in hopes of attaching their name to a given thinking, no matter how false or stupid.' - I really don't understand where you are coming from, or how one 'attaches their name' to thinking - is this just an effort to discredit people by insulting them and their posts? If someone really doesn't add anything to a debate, that will be obvious to all who read the thread - for instance just throwing out one liners that have nothing to do with the subject. I, for one, am interested in what some others in here think on this 'greed' subject precisely because the term is so vague which leaves alot open to personal interpretation... having grounded the term, it will be interesting to see how folks apply it. But, if you are going to rough-shod insult anyone who questions a particular phrase or meaning, then I don't see this thread as have much hope coming to anything relatively productive.

anyways....
does everyone else agree on this 'abandonment of concern' definition?

michael

Man Against Time · Jan 26, 2004, 01:13 pm

I was actually referring to philosophy trends and recognized names, not posters here. I was addressing the fact that a lot of people who call themselves philosophers (in the published, big time sense, not guys around here), really just want badly to be recognized, so they will coin a phrase or attach their name to some idiotic way of thinking, no matter how foolish it is, so they can have their name attached to something.

jhfenton · Jan 26, 2004, 03:58 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Leopard,)
<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Man Against Time,)
No, I said abandonment of concern for how one acquires excess is greedy.<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

ok, after thinking about it for awhile, I agree with this definition, at least it is usable.
anyways....
does everyone else agree on this 'abandonment of concern' definition?

michael<hr size="1" /></blockquote>Hi, Michael!

It's good enough for me. It's fairly close to my original functional definition. To me, greed is about what you are willing to do to get what you want, not how much you have or how much more you want.

Man Against Time · Jan 27, 2004, 06:22 am

Well, that being said, greed is only good in the warped minds of the greedy, whose selfishness extends to ethical realms as well. They are willing to reshape even principle to fit their own appetites, in this case, for justification and to alleviate their guilt.

Impenitent · Jan 27, 2004, 09:21 am

is it not your greed and selfishness that wants to dictate how everyone else sees the world?

people are greedy and selfish... that's just human nature...

castille · Jan 27, 2004, 09:41 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Impenitent,)
is it not your greed and selfishness that wants to dictate how everyone else sees the world? <hr size="1" /></blockquote>

BINGO! This is greed. Saying "the world should be communist" or "I wish everyone would hold hands and be nice" is a form of greed.

the c/b · Jan 27, 2004, 03:58 pm

Greed is good ,greed leads to forward thinking,

I have to be better than someone else

I need to improve

thus new ideas occur,

inventions happen

people think

evolution is possible

we know that it has happened

not by sitting there being content , but by being greedy

wanting more

we evolve

hopefully for the better

Man Against Time · Jan 29, 2004, 10:33 am

That does not lead to the actual "improvement" of anything. Who is a good man in a society that is only driven by greed? Obviously, the most ambitious, the most willing to level everything in his path to "improve." But what improves? I have no trouble seeing why someone so vulgar and crude and blind would believe a constant agitation and mania for attainment is a good thing, but I fail to see how you can try and apply this to man. My neighbor wanting to be the "best" guy in the neighborhood at everything and willing to do anything to achieve that rank is... dangerous, stupid, and unhealthy, even for him. We have the fastest runners, the smartest teachers, the most able leaders, and the bravest warriors when society has relatively little greed, because there are no cut-throat envious and agitated children trying to throw down the fast or the intelligent or the capable or the brave by any means necessary.

BINGO! This is greed. Saying "the world should be communist" or "I wish everyone would hold hands and be nice" is a form of greed.

Perhaps, but I am by no means just trying to impose my own subjective opinion on everything merely becasue it is my own opinion. If you try and trace a Communists, or a hippie's, or any other sentimental invalid's opinion back to anything concrete, you will find it always only rests in their own sentiment. I am arguing from an entirely different, entirely objective perspective. I am not saying, "Do this because I say so."

darwinist · Jan 30, 2004, 02:58 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by
Greed is good ,greed leads to forward thinking,

I have to be better than someone else

I need to improve

thus new ideas occur,

inventions happen

people think

evolution is possible

we know that it has happened

not by sitting there being content , but by being greedy

wanting more

we evolve

hopefully for the better<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

There is a saying somewhere. Invention is the mother of necessity.

Not greed.

The whole basis of human life. Is based upon 'survivial', not 'greed'. Greed is only a by product of the 4 underlining survival traits. Making the above posts, IMO a heap of rubbish.

Leopard · Jan 30, 2004, 02:26 pm

they quote is ' Necessity is the Mother of Invention' not the other way around. I agree with the rubbish comment

castille · Jan 31, 2004, 11:24 am

If necessity was the mother of all inventions....

Why was the lightbulb invented? Did Edison REALLY DESPERATELY need a lightbulb? If he didnt have a lightbulb would he die?

Necessity breeds laziness. After all, if necessity runs our society, we dont need ANYTHING except bread and water.

Man Against Time · Jan 31, 2004, 03:50 pm

That is very flawed. Bread implies a very complex arrangement of land distribution, agriculture, perhaps irrigation, social codes, ovens and cooking technology, some kind of storage capacity, transportation to areas where making bread is impossible, etc etc etc. Regular human interaction requires a whole lot of innovation, free of greed. Selfishness, probably, but not taken to a harmful extreme.

castille · Jan 31, 2004, 09:10 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Man Against Time,)
That is very flawed. Bread implies a very complex arrangement of land distribution, agriculture, perhaps irrigation, social codes, ovens and cooking technology, some kind of storage capacity, transportation to areas where making bread is impossible, etc etc etc. <hr size="1" /></blockquote>

You are thinking from a 21st century perspective. Ovens? Did people in medieval times have ovens?

All we need for bread (or rice or meat) is a plot of land, a grinding mill, and a granary to store the uneaten bread. In cooking terms, all we need is wood to cook the bread (fire).

If necessity drives our lives, then we can live like cavemen.

After all, is a computer really necessity to survival? Is a microwave necessary in order to survive? Yes I know today people can't live without mobile phones and computers and cars, but those are luxuries, not necessities.

darwinist · Feb 2, 2004, 08:58 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr size="1" />Originally Posted by
If necessity was the mother of all inventions....

Why was the lightbulb invented? Did Edison REALLY DESPERATELY need a lightbulb? If he didnt have a lightbulb would he die?
<hr size="1" /></blockquote>

I say you should read this sentence again. Neccissity is the "mother" of all inventions.

We are the great, great, great grand children of this process.

Survivail is the underlying drive. Can we survive without computer and all that other stuff. The anwser is of course we can. If we choose to return, to cave live 'living' condition.

But also as humans. We want ot 'improve' ourselfs and our lives.

So your the one 'thinking' in 21 century terms.

Man Against Time · Feb 2, 2004, 01:02 pm

You are thinking from a 21st century perspective. Ovens? Did people in medieval times have ovens?

...yes.

All we need for bread (or rice or meat) is a plot of land,

"All we need is a plot of land," shows painful ignorance to the complexities of land ownership. Having a system that even allows for it shows an enormous amount of sophistication.

a grinding mill,

Again, implies a complex information network, and more than likely, a system of ownership where a given man or system controls the mill and a given population supplies and rents or uses it. But this is getting away from the point.

and a granary to store the uneaten bread.

Which in your greed as a virtue society, would need a very complex arrangement of security and police forces to prevent the grain from being stolen or sabotaged and poisoned.

In cooking terms, all we need is wood to cook the bread (fire).

No. You do not hold flour over a fire to make bread.

If necessity drives our lives, then we can live like cavemen.

After all, is a computer really necessity to survival? Is a microwave necessary in order to survive? Yes I know today people can't live without mobile phones and computers and cars, but those are luxuries, not necessities.

You are also getting away from the point. This is a stupid modernist trick to arguing, where you make believe everyone has to either endorse living in the mud, or living in an asphalt runaway beast of tens of millions of people.

Guess what- You can have little luxuries and not be greedy. You are leaving out the whole, "No regard for the method of attaining..." aspect of greed. Greed is not, "having more than you need to survive."

castille · Feb 5, 2004, 10:05 am

"All we need is a plot of land," shows painful ignorance to the complexities of land ownership. Having a system that even allows for it shows an enormous amount of sophistication.

Then the greed of human nature created such a system. Cavemen got along without any systems. We can live like cavemen if necessary.

Again, implies a complex information network, and more than likely, a system of ownership where a given man or system controls the mill and a given population supplies and rents or uses it. But this is getting away from the point.

No you don't. Just use your hands.

No. You do not hold flour over a fire to make bread.

Yes, you do. You ever made damper before? Flour, bit of water, fire, and thats it. Cook it well and you'll get a rough but very edible bread. When I was 8 I was taught to do that.

Guess what- You can have little luxuries and not be greedy. You are leaving out the whole, "No regard for the method of attaining..." aspect of greed. Greed is not, "having more than you need to survive."

Then it would be greedy to kill an animal to eat it? Or disrespecting the Earth by sowing crops and pulling it out?

Greed is everywhere. And no matter what system we use, we cant get rid of it.

Jan 25, 2004, 11:42 am	#21 (permalink) (top)
castille Citizen #21521 Posts: 2,599	You argue excessiveness is greed.... So if I am really kind, I am greedy? Ideological loyalty is the act of giving your soul to a vague concept, to be manipulated by people smarter than you.

Jan 25, 2004, 11:50 am	#22 (permalink) (top)
Man Against Time Molten Ash Location: NJ Posts: 113	No, I said abandonment of concern for how one acquires excess is greedy. "Die! Fall upon your sword. Fall upon your knee. Die like your Son, nailed to his Tree. Die by my hand. Die in my heart, plucked from the Ice; forever cold."

Jan 26, 2004, 12:32 am	#23 (permalink) (top)
Impenitent Hot Lava Posts: 1,859	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Man Against Time,) No, I said abandonment of concern for how one acquires excess is greedy.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> abandonment of concern is maybe immoral or unethical... it isn't greedy and then your abandonment of concern only is immoral or unethical if you adhere to specific ethical or moral standards... "I really like this jacket, but the sleeves are much too long..." insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results...

Jan 26, 2004, 07:57 am	#24 (permalink) (top)
Man Against Time Molten Ash Location: NJ Posts: 113	...which everyone does except sociopaths, once you weed through the semantic bullshit that pseudo-thinkers like to pile on in hopes of attaching their name to a given thinking, no matter how false or stupid. "Die! Fall upon your sword. Fall upon your knee. Die like your Son, nailed to his Tree. Die by my hand. Die in my heart, plucked from the Ice; forever cold."

Jan 26, 2004, 01:06 pm	#25 (permalink) (top)
Leopard Propertarian Posts: 568	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Man Against Time,) No, I said abandonment of concern for how one acquires excess is greedy.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> ok, after thinking about it for awhile, I agree with this definition, at least it is usable. Mr. Against TIme, twice now you have made reference to 'semantic bullshit that pseudo-thinkers like to pile on in hopes of attaching their name to a given thinking, no matter how false or stupid.' - I really don't understand where you are coming from, or how one 'attaches their name' to thinking - is this just an effort to discredit people by insulting them and their posts? If someone really doesn't add anything to a debate, that will be obvious to all who read the thread - for instance just throwing out one liners that have nothing to do with the subject. I, for one, am interested in what some others in here think on this 'greed' subject precisely because the term is so vague which leaves alot open to personal interpretation... having grounded the term, it will be interesting to see how folks apply it. But, if you are going to rough-shod insult anyone who questions a particular phrase or meaning, then I don't see this thread as have much hope coming to anything relatively productive. anyways.... does everyone else agree on this 'abandonment of concern' definition? michael Take on the responsibility to be free

Jan 26, 2004, 01:13 pm	#26 (permalink) (top)
Man Against Time Molten Ash Location: NJ Posts: 113	I was actually referring to philosophy trends and recognized names, not posters here. I was addressing the fact that a lot of people who call themselves philosophers (in the published, big time sense, not guys around here), really just want badly to be recognized, so they will coin a phrase or attach their name to some idiotic way of thinking, no matter how foolish it is, so they can have their name attached to something. "Die! Fall upon your sword. Fall upon your knee. Die like your Son, nailed to his Tree. Die by my hand. Die in my heart, plucked from the Ice; forever cold."

Jan 26, 2004, 03:58 pm	#27 (permalink) (top)
jhfenton Molten Ash Location: Norwood, OH Posts: 28	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Leopard,) </span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Man Against Time,) No, I said abandonment of concern for how one acquires excess is greedy.<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> ok, after thinking about it for awhile, I agree with this definition, at least it is usable. anyways.... does everyone else agree on this 'abandonment of concern' definition? michael<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'>Hi, Michael! It's good enough for me. It's fairly close to my original functional definition. To me, greed is about what you are willing to do to get what you want, not how much you have or how much more you want. Politics, Firearms, Finance, Marathons Check out my blog, <span style='color:green'>Politics, etc.</span>

Jan 27, 2004, 06:22 am	#28 (permalink) (top)
Man Against Time Molten Ash Location: NJ Posts: 113	Well, that being said, greed is only good in the warped minds of the greedy, whose selfishness extends to ethical realms as well. They are willing to reshape even principle to fit their own appetites, in this case, for justification and to alleviate their guilt. "Die! Fall upon your sword. Fall upon your knee. Die like your Son, nailed to his Tree. Die by my hand. Die in my heart, plucked from the Ice; forever cold."

Jan 27, 2004, 09:21 am	#29 (permalink) (top)
Impenitent Hot Lava Posts: 1,859	is it not your greed and selfishness that wants to dictate how everyone else sees the world? people are greedy and selfish... that's just human nature... "I really like this jacket, but the sleeves are much too long..." insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, but expecting different results...

Jan 27, 2004, 09:41 am	#30 (permalink) (top)
castille Citizen #21521 Posts: 2,599	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Impenitent,) is it not your greed and selfishness that wants to dictate how everyone else sees the world? <hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> BINGO! This is greed. Saying "the world should be communist" or "I wish everyone would hold hands and be nice" is a form of greed. Ideological loyalty is the act of giving your soul to a vague concept, to be manipulated by people smarter than you.

Jan 27, 2004, 03:58 pm	#31 (permalink) (top)
the c/b Sedimentary Rock Posts: 9	Greed is good ,greed leads to forward thinking, I have to be better than someone else I need to improve thus new ideas occur, inventions happen people think evolution is possible we know that it has happened not by sitting there being content , but by being greedy wanting more we evolve hopefully for the better bullshit stinks, but it is good for your roses

Jan 29, 2004, 10:33 am	#32 (permalink) (top)
Man Against Time Molten Ash Location: NJ Posts: 113	That does not lead to the actual "improvement" of anything. Who is a good man in a society that is only driven by greed? Obviously, the most ambitious, the most willing to level everything in his path to "improve." But what improves? I have no trouble seeing why someone so vulgar and crude and blind would believe a constant agitation and mania for attainment is a good thing, but I fail to see how you can try and apply this to man. My neighbor wanting to be the "best" guy in the neighborhood at everything and willing to do anything to achieve that rank is... dangerous, stupid, and unhealthy, even for him. We have the fastest runners, the smartest teachers, the most able leaders, and the bravest warriors when society has relatively little greed, because there are no cut-throat envious and agitated children trying to throw down the fast or the intelligent or the capable or the brave by any means necessary. BINGO! This is greed. Saying "the world should be communist" or "I wish everyone would hold hands and be nice" is a form of greed. Perhaps, but I am by no means just trying to impose my own subjective opinion on everything merely becasue it is my own opinion. If you try and trace a Communists, or a hippie's, or any other sentimental invalid's opinion back to anything concrete, you will find it always only rests in their own sentiment. I am arguing from an entirely different, entirely objective perspective. I am not saying, "Do this because I say so." "Die! Fall upon your sword. Fall upon your knee. Die like your Son, nailed to his Tree. Die by my hand. Die in my heart, plucked from the Ice; forever cold."

Jan 30, 2004, 02:58 am	#33 (permalink) (top)
darwinist Igneous Magma Location: Netherlands Posts: 200	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by Greed is good ,greed leads to forward thinking, I have to be better than someone else I need to improve thus new ideas occur, inventions happen people think evolution is possible we know that it has happened not by sitting there being content , but by being greedy wanting more we evolve hopefully for the better<hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> There is a saying somewhere. Invention is the mother of necessity. Not greed. The whole basis of human life. Is based upon 'survivial', not 'greed'. Greed is only a by product of the 4 underlining survival traits. Making the above posts, IMO a heap of rubbish. What goes 'up', must come 'down', unless it goes around and round.

Jan 30, 2004, 02:26 pm	#34 (permalink) (top)
Leopard Propertarian Posts: 568	they quote is ' Necessity is the Mother of Invention' not the other way around. I agree with the rubbish comment Take on the responsibility to be free

Jan 31, 2004, 11:24 am	#35 (permalink) (top)
castille Citizen #21521 Posts: 2,599	If necessity was the mother of all inventions.... Why was the lightbulb invented? Did Edison REALLY DESPERATELY need a lightbulb? If he didnt have a lightbulb would he die? Necessity breeds laziness. After all, if necessity runs our society, we dont need ANYTHING except bread and water. Ideological loyalty is the act of giving your soul to a vague concept, to be manipulated by people smarter than you.

Jan 31, 2004, 03:50 pm	#36 (permalink) (top)
Man Against Time Molten Ash Location: NJ Posts: 113	That is very flawed. Bread implies a very complex arrangement of land distribution, agriculture, perhaps irrigation, social codes, ovens and cooking technology, some kind of storage capacity, transportation to areas where making bread is impossible, etc etc etc. Regular human interaction requires a whole lot of innovation, free of greed. Selfishness, probably, but not taken to a harmful extreme. "Die! Fall upon your sword. Fall upon your knee. Die like your Son, nailed to his Tree. Die by my hand. Die in my heart, plucked from the Ice; forever cold."

Jan 31, 2004, 09:10 pm	#37 (permalink) (top)
castille Citizen #21521 Posts: 2,599	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by (Man Against Time,) That is very flawed. Bread implies a very complex arrangement of land distribution, agriculture, perhaps irrigation, social codes, ovens and cooking technology, some kind of storage capacity, transportation to areas where making bread is impossible, etc etc etc. <hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> You are thinking from a 21st century perspective. Ovens? Did people in medieval times have ovens? All we need for bread (or rice or meat) is a plot of land, a grinding mill, and a granary to store the uneaten bread. In cooking terms, all we need is wood to cook the bread (fire). If necessity drives our lives, then we can live like cavemen. After all, is a computer really necessity to survival? Is a microwave necessary in order to survive? Yes I know today people can't live without mobile phones and computers and cars, but those are luxuries, not necessities. Ideological loyalty is the act of giving your soul to a vague concept, to be manipulated by people smarter than you.

Feb 2, 2004, 08:58 am	#38 (permalink) (top)
darwinist Igneous Magma Location: Netherlands Posts: 200	</span><blockquote><span class="smallfont">Quote:</span><hr size="1" />Originally Posted by If necessity was the mother of all inventions.... Why was the lightbulb invented? Did Edison REALLY DESPERATELY need a lightbulb? If he didnt have a lightbulb would he die? <hr size="1" /></blockquote><span class='postcolor'> I say you should read this sentence again. Neccissity is the "mother" of all inventions. We are the great, great, great grand children of this process. Survivail is the underlying drive. Can we survive without computer and all that other stuff. The anwser is of course we can. If we choose to return, to cave live 'living' condition. But also as humans. We want ot 'improve' ourselfs and our lives. So your the one 'thinking' in 21 century terms. What goes 'up', must come 'down', unless it goes around and round.

Feb 2, 2004, 01:02 pm	#39 (permalink) (top)
Man Against Time Molten Ash Location: NJ Posts: 113	You are thinking from a 21st century perspective. Ovens? Did people in medieval times have ovens? ...yes. All we need for bread (or rice or meat) is a plot of land, "All we need is a plot of land," shows painful ignorance to the complexities of land ownership. Having a system that even allows for it shows an enormous amount of sophistication. a grinding mill, Again, implies a complex information network, and more than likely, a system of ownership where a given man or system controls the mill and a given population supplies and rents or uses it. But this is getting away from the point. and a granary to store the uneaten bread. Which in your greed as a virtue society, would need a very complex arrangement of security and police forces to prevent the grain from being stolen or sabotaged and poisoned. In cooking terms, all we need is wood to cook the bread (fire). No. You do not hold flour over a fire to make bread. If necessity drives our lives, then we can live like cavemen. After all, is a computer really necessity to survival? Is a microwave necessary in order to survive? Yes I know today people can't live without mobile phones and computers and cars, but those are luxuries, not necessities. You are also getting away from the point. This is a stupid modernist trick to arguing, where you make believe everyone has to either endorse living in the mud, or living in an asphalt runaway beast of tens of millions of people. Guess what- You can have little luxuries and not be greedy. You are leaving out the whole, "No regard for the method of attaining..." aspect of greed. Greed is not, "having more than you need to survive." "Die! Fall upon your sword. Fall upon your knee. Die like your Son, nailed to his Tree. Die by my hand. Die in my heart, plucked from the Ice; forever cold."

Feb 5, 2004, 10:05 am	#40 (permalink) (top)
castille Citizen #21521 Posts: 2,599	"All we need is a plot of land," shows painful ignorance to the complexities of land ownership. Having a system that even allows for it shows an enormous amount of sophistication. Then the greed of human nature created such a system. Cavemen got along without any systems. We can live like cavemen if necessary. Again, implies a complex information network, and more than likely, a system of ownership where a given man or system controls the mill and a given population supplies and rents or uses it. But this is getting away from the point. No you don't. Just use your hands. No. You do not hold flour over a fire to make bread. Yes, you do. You ever made damper before? Flour, bit of water, fire, and thats it. Cook it well and you'll get a rough but very edible bread. When I was 8 I was taught to do that. Guess what- You can have little luxuries and not be greedy. You are leaving out the whole, "No regard for the method of attaining..." aspect of greed. Greed is not, "having more than you need to survive." Then it would be greedy to kill an animal to eat it? Or disrespecting the Earth by sowing crops and pulling it out? Greed is everywhere. And no matter what system we use, we cant get rid of it. Ideological loyalty is the act of giving your soul to a vague concept, to be manipulated by people smarter than you.