Is it possible to be too ambitious to get menial jobs?

That is the exact point I've been trying to make.

Also, there's nothing wrong with being idealistic, however, once you get into the real world, you will need to decide whether or not you would rather survive, or place people who consider you disposable above your own needs. Whenever possible, leave a job on your own terms, not theirs.

In fact, you should be idealistic; you should, however, also be realistic about how to realize your idealism.

edited 11th Sep '11 2:53:14 PM by tropetown

Agree to Disagree is my position as well.

I agree with USAF. I won't lie on my resume or applications for jobs, because it's about principles. I like my moral code to actually have meaning. If I decide "I'm not going to do X thing because I think it is wrong", I am going to hold to that ideal until extreme circumstances intervene.

What is the point of having a moral code if you throw it out the window as soon as it inconveniences or disadvantages you in some way?

Be not afraid...

There is none. But then, I think having a moral code that significantly inconveniences or disadvantages you is also pointless. Principles should be subservient to us, not the other way around.

That's the thing then. Any kind of moral code is invariably going to put you at a disadvantage when dealing with someone who doesn't play by the same rules. And since you'll likely have no way of knowing how much of a disadvantage you'll be at...

The solution, whatever it may be, is not to abandon any kind of moral code.

Expergiscēre cras, medior quam hodie. (Awaken tomorrow, better than today.)

So tell me USAF what do you do when your only choices are to work for people who only use dishonest hiring practices and your honesty only gets you kicked out of the pool? Your honesty with them gets you nothing and it quite literally comes down to a catch 22. Damned if you do damned if you don't.

Who watches the watchmen?

It is the solution to the problem of having one's range of options constrained by the presence of a moral code. I will grant that there are various other problems that it won't solve (e.g. lack of skills/knowledge), though.

But that doesn't strike me as a reason to keep having a moral code. It seems to me that having a set of "rules" is unnecessary. Whatever outcomes you desire for yourself or for others, just look at each situation you encounter and choose whichever options stand to bring you closest to producing those outcomes. Why limit your options beforehand?

The thing is though, you can't ever exactly predict what kind of situations you'll find yourself in. You'll never know what those options are in advance.

In short, the only way to prevent yourself from ever being limited by your moral code...is to abandon it completely, and become totally amoral. I highly doubt that's what you're advocating, Tongpu, but that is the logical extreme of what you are saying.

Expergiscēre cras, medior quam hodie. (Awaken tomorrow, better than today.)

Exactly.

Exactly. Though let's be clear what this means— it means making decisions based on things other than morality. Morality is not what makes humans care about each other's welfare, or the continuing existence and prosperity of the society in which they live. So abandoning one's moral code is not synonymous with "act malevolently", or some such other nonsense. It mainly means "keep your options open and be willing to adapt."

That being said, it seems you are now agreeing with what I said earlier— "[abandoning any sort of moral code] is the solution to the problem of having one's range of options constrained by the presence of a moral code". What I don't understand is your rationale in post 105 for saying that this isn't the solution.

That is exactly what I am advocating, although it occurs to me moral codes based on ethical egoism don't appear particularly disadvantageous either, so I'd also advocate those.

You reform the system itself.

I am now known as Flyboy.

Because society is dependent on its members having moral codes to began with? Everyone here has one, including you (although you don't seem to want to admit it).

A moral code is nothing more than your response to how you think other people will act. Because to a degree you want their approval in some fashion, you set restraints on your own behavior to get it. Since most people won't give such approval to someone who leaves the option of acting malevolently open, one of the common key requirements is that you foreswear any behavior that readily lends itself to such malevolence. What this translates to varies from culture to culture, and often is situational too. It could include or exclude Arson, Murder, and Jaywalking.

Which brings us back to USAF's problem, since he thinks that lying is pure evil. He's holding on to a universal principle, which seems to be the thing you are really arguing against, rather than moral codes in general.

Expergiscēre cras, medior quam hodie. (Awaken tomorrow, better than today.)

I'm with Tongpu on this one. I know that almost any job I decide to apply for is a job that I can easily learn to do and do well, so I'll turd polish the crap out of my resume to ensure I get it. I'll never lie, but I will definitely embellish. It's what's gotten me a lot of interviews recently in my hunt for a better job.

Nothing wrong with that, I suppose.

I'm not saying it's a universal principle, in a functional sense. That would be idiotic. But I expect people to be consistent. If they think lying is bad, then lying is bad. If not, then don't try to claim you do.

I am now known as Flyboy.

Personally, I have a special loathing for people who never work until they are out of college, especially art majors.

Experience > Education. Any. Fucking. Day.(Specialized fields being an exception)

edited 12th Sep '11 8:23:09 PM by Barkey

I was about to say, what about people who have a very full-on degree and know what they really want out of life? My degree is five years long not counting specialisation. I wanted to get a start on that thing so that I graduate sometime before I'm 25.

I don't see much point in faffing around delivering pizzas and being bored for a few years, just to fulfil some arbitrary 'life experience' quota, when I could be out there getting my degree and doing what I want with my life.

Be not afraid...

This was part of what I was trying to say in the OP.

^^

The idea that people can just stay in school for over half a decade without working is just abhorrent to me. Partially because I was in a rather unfortunate bracket when I was initially college aged.

My family wasn't rich enough to send me to college, but not poor enough for me to qualify for any legitimate aid money. So I enlisted, and now I'm almost to my bachelors.

I just hate that shit, I've met a lot of arrogant prick ass students who've never worked a day in their god damn life and think they know everything. The fact that there are students out there with so many scholarships and grants that they make more disposable income a month than me, when I have an actual career, is just abhorrent.

It's like some of the med students at CSUCI nearby.. I see some of them driving fucking BMW's.

edited 12th Sep '11 10:08:45 PM by Barkey

Wow, needing to lock two threads within five minutes of each other for rampant off-topic and general bitching? I think that's a new record. Not one I ever hope to break.

...if you don’t love you’re dead, and if you do, they’ll kill you for it.