i acquired it then because i was thinking about how unrequited desire maintains interest, but really it was more akin to the obsession experienced with a random reward schedule
"the experiment might be said to demonstrate a sort of superstition. the bird behaves as if there was a causal relation between its behavior and the presentation of food, although such a relation is lacking"
there's a lot of these that are like "wow that's a deep thought!" if you've never read any philosophy and you don't realize she's poorly articulating the defunct history of western thought
okay lowkey i'm the one slopping it up i'm being just as unrigorous in my response and thoughts about this but that's because the original is so jumbled lol
in some ways it reminds me of those proto anarchists that were like "guys let's just simplify the rules to a dozen or so and hang them up at the town square" but i don't really feel like drawing out the connection
gratitude is lauded as the remedy for envy but i have my doubts. it's still self-diminishing and accommodating oneself to taking pride in mediocrity. i suppose that's an envious persons mentality. it could be seen as replacing a sense of lacked possession with an appreciation for current possessions
idk it just feels like a misdirection rather than a proper remedy. it has the air of a bad spiral of powerlessness, which makes sense because it is a christian virtue after all
i guess this also doesn't address the fantasy nature of envy but that also feels like a strategy for misdirection and as a reassurance that there is no necessity to change
i also think like, jealousy as frustration with another's attention has a lot more going for it than it normally gets credit for. mostly because the cultural forms it continually finds itself bound to are grotesque
i think you could argue that those are likely implications, and a lot of philosophy of science kind of takes that for granted especially on a rhetorical level, but yes very distinct things and id be mistaking the effect for the cause
supposed* cause. there are some compelling reasons to believe in the emergent properties of theoretical parsimony if you're a positivist and/or have a relatively narrow scope