Bay Area house party

Scott Alexander: Bay Area House Party, part 5

”You spot someone you vaguely know, Nishin, and see that he’s started wearing a crucifix. You are briefly concerned that the figure on the Cross will be Sam Altman, but on closer inspection it (mercifully) appears to be the Christ.

“Hi Nishin,” you say. “You look different.” Specifically, he’s clean-shaven, and has covered up his arm tattoo.

“Yeah,” says Nishin. “I finally took the plunge and converted to Catholicism last month.”

“Why? When I knew you a few years ago you were a Dawkins-reading atheist.”

“Dawkins makes some good points,” says Nishin. “But I’ve been reading Ayaan Hirsi Ali, and I think I agree with her more pragmatic perspective. Religion isn’t about who created the world when. It’s about what kind of ethical and social commitments are necessary to run a flourishing society.”

“I don’t know if religion always leads to a flourishing society. Sometimes it can make things worse. Like, what about the Israel-Palestine conflict?”

“Oh, I don’t believe in that.”

“You don’t believe in the Israel-Palestine conflict?”

“Like I said, I’m a pragmatist now. If the Israel-Palestine conflict existed, it would be a strong argument against religion, and make lots of people become atheists. But religion is necessary to hold society together. So for the good of society, I choose not to believe in it.”

“I think you’re doing pragmatism wrong. That’s not how it’s supposed to work.”

“If I was doing pragmatism wrong, then I would have switch to doing it right. And by your supposition, then I would have to believe in the Israel-Palestine conflict. And that would make me less religious, which would be bad for society. So from a pragmatic point of view, I’m doing pragmatism exactly right, no matter what the philosophers say.”

“But - “ You grope for words, but realize you are unlikely to convince him on his own terms. You end up just sputtering in disbelief. “You - you can’t just deny the Israel-Palestine conflict! And there are religious aspects to almost every conflict! Are you going to deny the Ukraine war?”

“I deny the Ukraine war”, says a woman sitting next to you, who introduces herself as Irina.

“How can you deny it? You can just watch the news! Or go to Kiev!”

“I live in Kiev,” says Irina.”

—

”You head into the kitchen and take a potato chip from the bowl. It’s completely tasteless. You almost spit it out in surprise.

“What is this?” you ask Hans and Jonathan, the caterers. “Is this another one of your weird food startup schemes?”

“Well we were thinking . . . “ says Hans.

“People say that modern food is addictive,” interrupts Jonathan. “But it really isn’t. It’s shocking how little work people put into optimizing the addictiveness of food. Like, the one thing you learn in every Intro Psychology class . . . “

“ . . . is that intermittent reward is the most addictive reinforcement schedule,” interrupts Jonathan. “It’s what drives gacha games and slot machines. So we invented . . . . “

“ . . . the intermittent reinforcement potato chip!” concludes Hans. “Four out of every five are just plain potato slices. But the fifth has more salt and oil than any of the other leading brands.”

You take another potato chip. Tasteless again. Another. Still tasteless. A fourth. Your mouth explodes with a sudden shock of flavor, even stronger for its unexpectedness.

“So, you’re, like, trying to make even worse, more addictive food than everyone else? Isn’t that a little, you know, unethical?”

“On contraire!” says Jonathan. “A bag of these potato chips only has a fifth as much salt and oil as the normal brand. But they’re more addictive! You’ll replace those ones with ours, and cut your sodium and fat intake 80%!”

You do find yourself oddly driven to keep munching on the potato chips. Before you become a hopeless addict, you bid Hans and Jonathan good-bye.”