Ethics, Experience & Education Worth Anything?

[Lantern]

OK Pov...this is for you, my thoughts on the subject.

 

There are several problems here. First, is that people only see things in a straight line. At one end of the line you have egoism and at the other you have altruism. The thinking would then be applied that if one begins to act selfishly that they would move in the direction of egoism and away from altruism. Obviously this would apply to someone who is operating in the other direction. If one begins to act selflessly they would move toward altruism and away from egoism.

 

The solution is that the two need to be separated from each other. Instead of looking at this issue as linear it should be viewed as functioning on multiple levels and in different plains on two different axis. Just because one acts selfishly (egoism) does not mean that they are becoming more altruistic (selfless). Instead, it needs to be viewed as someone doing something for themselves that can also have a positive impact on others.

 

For example, if I go to a garage sale and find a Very Good condition GA book for $.50 I can do an egotistic act by purchasing the book and making myself feel better. I then walk away and think nothing about the seller. The seller in turn pockets my $.50 and feels good about making some money on an item that he/she no longer wants. That is where the story should end. I performed an act that is high in egoism as well as altruism. The seller feels that he has done an egotistical act as well as an altruistic act. Everyone feels good and no one gets hurt.

 

The other problem contained in the discussion is the ratios applied to the scenario. At what point can I purchase the comic and not be judge as being and egoist, con-artist, or an overall bad person. If the person selling comics at the garage sale sells me a box of mixed comics that end up costing me $0.30 per comic do we then stand there and argue over the 100 worthless X-Force 1's, 20 McFarlane Spider-Mans, or 50 Spawn comics that he just dumped on me, or do we argue over the fact that I just got one single $20 GA book for $0.30.

 

Yet another problem is applying ones economic sense of value to another persons economic sense of value. As has been clearly stated numerous times before Joe Collector would not touch a USM 1 White. Therefore, lets assume that he sees a NM USM 1 White at a garage sale for $1. It is safe to say that he would not buy it, instead he buys something else that is market priced and to his personal liking. Darth comes along and walks past the item that Joe just purchased and purchases the USM 1 white. Perhaps Darth had the fleeting thought that whatever it was that Joe purchased was a waste of money. It can be safe to assume that Joe thought that about the USM 1 White. Again, that is where this scenario should end. The buyers got to do an egotistical act by purchasing an item they feel good about and the seller got to feel good about his selling of unwanted items. At the other end of the spectrum everyone got to perform a truly altruistic act because no matter how you look at it the other individuals feel good about the sales or purchase that they have made.

 

 

[rob_react]

Why do you take the time to reply to the incidental and ignore my posts that try to get to the core of the issue?

 

Trutfully, I do not want to get to the core of the issue with you guys. It's dark, dirty and smelly in the bowels of your collective ethics, and I feel like an innocent guy sentenced to life on Devil's Island.

 

If you'd only thought of that a couple of days ago you could have devoted more energy to the Qualified Label thread!

[PedigreeMan]

Truthfully, I do not want to get to the core of the issue with you guys. It's dark, dirty and smelly in the bowels of your collective ethics, and I feel like an innocent guy sentenced to life on Devil's Island.

 

Spoken like a true Objectivist. Now if you had just said this 1000 posts ago you might have saved us all a lot of trouble.

[joe_collector]

Lantern, that's a lot like Chuck and other dealers stating that they "saved X collection for future generations to enjoy.. it was a labor of love".

 

Nice rationalization in order to make a truckload of money. Otherwise, why not do like those two "super nice guys" did recently and donate the books to a University/College reference libray or museum?

 

Those two are the real deal, and everyone else trying to walk the same line is a BS-artist.

[PedigreeMan]

OK Pov...this is for you, my thoughts on the subject.

 

...

snippage of the good stuff

...

 

 

Now we're getting somewhere! I knew this group had it in them!

[FlyingDonut]

Lantern, that's a lot like Chuck and other dealers stating that they "saved X collection for future generations to enjoy.. it was a labor of love".

 

Nice rationalization in order to make a truckload of money. Otherwise, why not do like those two "super nice guys" did recently and donate the books to a University/College reference libray or museum?

 

Those two are the real deal, and everyone else trying to walk the same line is a BS-artist.

 

 

The fact that they got a STAGGERINGLY large tax write-off probably had nothing to do with it. They donated their books purely out of the goodness inherent in their hearts.

 

I really want to know what planet you're living on, where all ethics questions are straight up black and white answers. By the way, you still haven't answered MY ethics quiz.

 

1) You go to a yard sale, and there's a stack of comics on a table. They are all marked 50 cents each. You flip through them and there's beat to [!@#%^&^] Care Bears, and all of a sudden there's a gorgeous Hulk 181. Not a CGC NM, but a nice solid VF book. There are a bunch of other Hulks from the same time period, but they're beat up. You ask the nice young couple holding the yard sale (they're moving and are selling their house) - are you sure this is supposed to be here (holding up the Hulk 181). The guy says, yeah, I bought a bunch of comics when I was in college and that was there - I was a big Star Wars collector. Never really liked Wolverine. Take it, I just don't want it any more. What do you do?

 

 

2) You're at the DC Big Flea Market at the Chantilly Expo Mart and an antiques dealer has a pile of old comics. Amongst the $15 priced Classics Illustrated 140 4th printings, the torn to [!@#%^&^] Looney Toones from 1959 for $15 there's an All-Winners 2 in VG- for $15 as well. What do you do?

 

3) A guy comes into a store that you frequent with a bag of comics and says "do you buy comics?" to the store owners. The store owner says, sort of smarmy-esque, looking around, yes, yes we do. Guy pulls out a stack of comics. Inside the bag are dreck, dreck, and more dreck, couple of nice enough 1970s Spideys and a bunch of undergrounds. Store says "I can't sell the undergrounds here, so I'll give you $50 for the lot." Guy says nah, I want to sell everything. Offers them to you. You know what the undergrounds are. First printing Zaps, Freak Brothers, etc. You say, "what do you want for them" Guy says $200. What do you do?

[joe_collector]

Spoken like a true Objectivist. Now if you had just said this 1000 posts ago you might have saved us all a lot of trouble.

 

Why are you spouting all this Objectivist BS?

 

I have respect for people outside our little enclave, and don't look down or despise those who can't quote the NM value of a Hulk 181 off the top of their head. Nothing more and nothing less.

 

Or as I call it, a proper upbringing.

[joe_collector]

The fact that they got a STAGGERINGLY large tax write-off probably had nothing to do with it. They donated their books purely out of the goodness inherent in their hearts.

 

Exactly what I thought Donut. These guys actually donate comics, and of course it's gotta be due to the tax write-off. It's always a shock to see someone actually give comics away, isn't it?

 

Go back to the thread and it's pretty easy to see the vehemence expressed in their for "those two !!".

[PovertyRow]

Trutfully, I do not want to get to the core of the issue with you guys.

 

I am not a plural. I am a singular.

[PovertyRow]

The solution is that the two need to be separated from each other. Instead of looking at this issue as linear it should be viewed as functioning on multiple levels and in different plains on two different axis. Just because one acts selfishly (egoism) does not mean that they are becoming more altruistic (selfless). Instead, it needs to be viewed as someone doing something for themselves that can also have a positive impact on others.

 

Actually this is similar to what I have been saying all along. Things are what they are. It is when we try to relate topic A to topic B that trouble occurs.

 

I still ask - is the many thousands of hours and dollars I have invested in actually LEARNING about comic books worth anything? Or should I just say "OK! I have invested tons of money and time and real study in this and I will tell you, person, old person or young person , who just slaps a valuable comic book on their table, that THIS PARTICULAR BOOK is actually worth a LOT. But you know, you should have researched this for yourself. You did not call me in as an expert. You did not call me at all except for your Yard Sale Signs that will probably remain on the lamp posts for weeks after it is over and will only be removed by rain or snow or hail.

 

Somif I can get it for a buck or 5, I will. Because I know and you don;t (bait for JC). But it also cost me a LOT to KNOW.

[PedigreeMan]

Spoken like a true Objectivist. Now if you had just said this 1000 posts ago you might have saved us all a lot of trouble.

 

Why are you spouting all this Objectivist BS?

 

I have respect for people outside our little enclave, and don't look down or despise those who can't quote the NM value of a Hulk 181 off the top of their head. Nothing more and nothing less.

 

Or as I call it, a proper upbringing.

 

Not sure where you're going with the whole Hulk #181 point ....

 

Your black & white attitude towards everything is right out of Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged, which is basically her treatise on a philosophy called "Objectivism." Objectivists see things as completely right or completely wrong with no middle ground whatsoever. If there is any twinge of guilt felt when doing an action, it is wrong, no matter the circumstances. Consequently, most Objectivists end up seeing the majority of people as immoral and tend to end up isolating themselves from the "great unwashed."

 

As I understand it, Objectivism seems like a very short-sighted view of an abnormally complex world. However, I am always open to learning new things and hearing other people's points of view. As a result, when what I thought was an Objectivist (you) popped up here, I thought I would take the opportunity to pick its brain on the subject. I realize I could just go read Atlas Shrugged, but this philosophy seems more like something that should be dissected via an Aristotelian approach. Hence, all of my poking, prodding, and "following you around like a puppy."

 

However, you clearly have no clue as to what I'm talking about, so you're obviously not a classical Objectivist. Probably also explains why you haven't been able to muster up a substantial argument with a solid foundation on all of the ethical questions posed here. In other words, you're the "puppy" here, Joe ... lost out in the darkness. Either come back to us in the light of the "ethical majority," or go learn some more about the underpinings of your current moral track and find the light there.

 

Either way, I hope you find a light somewhere. For mine and all of ours sakes.

 

Alan

[THE_BEYONDER]

" But it also cost me a LOT to KNOW. "

 

Sounds like you're starting to regret all the time you have spent collecting comic books....

[PovertyRow]

" But it also cost me a LOT to KNOW. "

 

Sounds like you're starting to regret all the time you have spent collecting comic books....

 

Actually- I am investing even more time and money into learning. It keeps me young! I LOVE this hobby - although I think "pursuit" is more accurate than "hobby"!

[MikeS]

I still ask - is the many thousands of hours and dollars I have invested in actually LEARNING about comic books worth anything?

 

Yes it is. People who go to garage sales on a regular basis usually know when they are getting a good deal - they know because they've educated themselves and spent time learning. Why should it be any different for us comic book collectors?

 

[ubiquiti]

I still ask - is the many thousands of hours and dollars I have invested in actually LEARNING about comic books worth anything? Or should I just say "OK! I have invested tons of money and time and real study in this and I will tell you, person, old person or young person , who just slaps a valuable comic book on their table, that THIS PARTICULAR BOOK is actually worth a LOT. But you know, you should have researched this for yourself. You did not call me in as an expert. You did not call me at all except for your Yard Sale Signs that will probably remain on the lamp posts for weeks after it is over and will only be removed by rain or snow or hail.

It is worth your happines. You obviously enjoy doing it. How much do we all spend to be entertained? I probably go to 25 new movies a year..take that at $8 a pop....$200. I also enjoy beer and Whiskey..another $500 -$100 per year. I also enjoy peanut butter - $80 per year?

You get the point.

[Lantern]

I still ask - is the many thousands of hours and dollars I have invested in actually LEARNING about comic books worth anything?

 

Yes, pov, it has all been a very good investment. I am still in awe that Joe keeps hanging on to this idea that he has of being the perfect altruistic human being, a veritable Mother Theresa if you will. If this concept and ideology that Joe paints of himself were true then he should be at every corner used car lot warning potential buyers about lemons, at every boiler room investment house warning the people they have cold called, and even at the casinos in Vegas warning people about the real odds of them winning anything at all.

 

To answer your question more directly, it has been money and time well spent only if you have received personal joy from the study of comics. If this study you have given your time to has paid dividends in other ways then all the better.

 

To add to my previous statements, the fact that one is being egotistic as well as altruistic is only half of the solution. Before Joe can paint dealers as being evil scam artists he needs to prove that they were acting with the intent to benefit themselves while wanting to harm others. For this to hold up to scrutiny, the other people would in fact have to be harmed. The fact of the matter is that no one forced these selers to sell their comics to anyone. They could have taken the time and effort to research the comics (much like you have), but in most cases they have not. Perhaps their time was more important than the potential payoff. Fianlly, if the transation actually took place then the seller must have been happy with it. After all, I have heard no reports of dealers getting arrested for attempting to purchase at gun point.

 

Final thought: Nietzsche said that altruism was demeaning. He postulated that by a person being altruistic was a way saying that some other person was more importnat than themselves. Further, he saw this as denigrating oneself, putting oneself down by valuing oneself less than the other.

[PovertyRow]

Even you must see the obvious negative connotations you place on these sellers

 

OK - an honest reply rather than a Ben reply.

 

No - i do NOT see any negative connotations I am putting on the seller. I am simply stating that it is obvious the seller has no interest in even beginning to understand what they have. They have just dumped that ASM 1 or that MM 12 or that Detective 1 (or instert your proclivity) on the table with a "lazy as I can be" price of a buck or 5 and thenexpect someone to educate them and tell them their book is worth x-much - or be more saintly and buy it for the fin and sell for a few grand and then give them a large percentage? For what? Are you paying them for their ignorance? Are you paying them for their laziness in not even TRYING to get a glimmer? (I mean, OS Guides are NOT hidden away in proprietary vaults - the6y are in frickin' Barnes And Noble for gosh sake!).

 

Just, exactly WHAT, friend Joe, are you paying them for by buying their book and then going back later and giving them a wad?

[PovertyRow]

You get the point.

 

err - actually, I don;t. Unless due to your experience in movies and drinking you can get shots for fifty cents and movie tickets for a quarter? And then you would be accused of being a horrible human.

 

I honestly do not get the point.

[PovertyRow]

Final thought: Nietzsche said that altruism was demeaning. He postulated that by a person being altruistic was a way saying that some other person was more importnat than themselves. Further, he saw this as denigrating oneself, putting oneself down by valuing oneself less than the other.

 

Nietzsche also said that "Truth is like a raven, attracted to the smell of carrion." That seems particularly applicable here!

[blutobc]

Okay, it is the seller's obligation to set the asking price for his item. This is standard in normal business transactions(ebay, sears, car dealer, accountant, etc.). The seller is solely responsible for figuring out what his item is worth to him.... and how much he is willing to part with the item.

 

A lazy exeception to this is the flea market mentality where bartering is still an active practice. I can't count the number of times that an item for sell at a flea market is unmarked(any item, not just comics). I ask the seller how much? He says "what would you give for it". At this point the seller is one of two kinds.

 

1) He really doesn't know the value...just that some people might pay money for it. He's trying to see if I can tell him its' current value, which leaves him free not to spend any of his "valuable time" in researching the value. This is lazy and is simply an attempt to steal my "valuable" research time(or POV's time).

 

2) He knows the value of the item, but he wants to see if I have a clue. If not then he will deal with we on his terms only... for his maximum benefit. If I do know the value then he will deal with me starting on equal terms.

 

Should I feel sympathy for either seller. Nope, they're not looking out for my best interest either, just themselves. If I make a deal with either one we both get what we deserve.

 

Now if the seller has openly labeled the selling price of his item...He has already determined its' worth to him. I get buy it free of any guilt. He has determined the amount of effort he wishes to spend to price the item.