<p>
</p>
<p>Ok fine, so let’s say I wanted Sarah Palin’s fame and money…</p>
<p>Seriously, I’m talking about “worldly pleasures” or even just notoriety for doing something. If I knew I could achieve it, would I sacrifice my free time to get there and would it be worth it?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes. lol</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>He’s quite the wordsmith. I’d call it divine inspiration…but I don’t believe in the divine…so…</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Um…are you a robot? Speaking from experience? ;P</p>
<p>If anything I would have to choose between The Terminator from T2 or Robocop from the first movie, indestructible, awesome guns, and the ability to say the perfect one liners in the perfect situation.</p>
<p>But for the people who actually want to be robots, just go to your local hospital/ engineering lab go up to someone and ask them if you can become a robot and will donate your body to do so.</p>
<p>If it works then come back here and posts your results. Then fly away with your now rocket powered feet into space.</p>
<p>
Come on, we don’t need any of this here. You’ll start it back up…</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I didn’t mean it literally, either. xD But hey, my fault for phrasing it poorly.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’m done. :)</p>
<p>Was it Douglas Hofstadter who said, “The day we’ll know robots are as smart as humans is the day you can have a conversation with one and not notice the difference”? (I’m paraphrasing.)</p>
<p>^Query: The punctuation mark always goes inside the quotation marks, correct?</p>
<p>
Except for question marks and exclamation points, when they were not originally part of the quote.</p>
<p>^Fixed it. Cheers.</p>
<p>…And silverturtle appears to have left just as things were getting interesting…</p>
<p>So you already are a robot, just not the robot you would like to be. How do you solve this problem of not being the robot you would like to be? You either somehow adjust your feelings of being troubled by the robot you’re not, so you’re not troubled anymore by the robot you are (this could be through changing the things you value, etc), OR you become the robot you want to be.</p>
<p>the second option is usually easier for these matters of wanting to be the robot society appreciates, because then not only do you solve your problem of not being the robot you want to be, but you get all this encouragement from society too.</p>
<p>Also, the consequences of being perceived negatively if you don’t become the robot you want to be (i.e don’t do the stuff you need to do to succeed in school) often end of motivating people to do the things that were hard for them before.</p>
<p>But if the consequences can’t motivate the person, then there is the first option. This isn’t a solution to societies’ perception of you, but it is a solution to being troubled by the robot you’re not.</p>
<p>Hmm. I do like how logical you make it, but I’m not being chastised for my failure to study for the ACT, nor is society necessarily pressuring me to study for the ACT. My robot dad and robot mom even went so far as to say that taking this test again would be a waste of time and I’d be a robot idiot to consider it.</p>
<p>So, I’m a rogue robot, and it’s self-motivation or bust.</p>
<p>But enough about me. My point was about becoming less inter- and intra-personal for the sake of productivity. I’m not sure that a “good robot” cares much for societal norms at all.</p>
<p>okay, i see.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>my robot looks at is as self-motivation or * something else *. The immediate alternative might be bust, but you won’t stay busted forever usually; usually you’ll find a sustainable alternative after awhile, even if you can’t imagine what that will be ahead of time.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I think what silver turtle said here was nice - ideally trying to align the two things, so you can get the inter-and intra- personal satisfaction from, as he said it, activities of high corporeal utility, and so the conflict between them (if there is one) disappears. It is murky territory because what achieves this for people will obviously vary dependent on that person.</p>
<p>hmm basically most people are fine with their robot’s inefficiencies. They have all sorts of ways to justify them as essential, or non-negotiable, etc., and to a degree this might be true. </p>
<p>I have heard one very intelligent person that is very concerned with efficiency, and who values altruism (just like someone might value sociality), say that he holds open doors for old ladies (something that might be considered inefficient) because if he doesn’t do so - doesn’t practice small altruistic acts - he will stop working properly. </p>
<p>On the hand there is a point where excusing inefficiencies as necessary behaviors can be taken way to far.</p>
<p>yeah! 
i’ll be wall-e just for a day i think.</p>