Fair means it conforms to certain rules: whether agreed as a community — or at least internally consistent and transparent.
Unfair means the opposite: it breaks the rules. Whether it’s rules decided as a community, or even any consistent and complete set of rules.
Random means it neither breaks the rules nor is explained by the rules being observed
For instance, what’s “fair”:
-if you played by the rules and won the game — you win the price. FAIR
-or if you stole money but were freed of all charges — you, from the law standpoint — have still “played by the rules”. FAIR.
-or if you started a business and grew it, and hired people and taught them, and you grew it together, and you compensated them, and you mutually agreed for the value being exchanged — you have also played “by the rules” — rules in your state, and rules between you and your employees. FAIR
-or if you promised to do something — and did it — you have played by the rules — rules you yourself declared. FAIR
-etc
Or for instance:
-You started a Youtube channel and played video games while making dumb jokes. You get CEO-compensation for your great contribution
=FAIR: according to law, according to capitalism.
=RANDOM: for the rules to explain your above-average reward are difficult to discern
=UNFAIR: according to many systems of value, your contribution is a fucking joke, or net-negative (wasting time)
What’s my point?
You can’t utter the word “FAIR” — without being mindful of the RULES.
Otherwise it doesn’t have any meaning
AND if you can’t discern the rules — you can also use the word “RANDOM”.
Which means you can declare agnosticism about whether something is UNFAIR or FAIR, and if it’s FAIR — then according to what rules
But just because it’s RANDOM doesn’t yet mean it’s UNFAIR
You don’t know if any rules have been broken
What’s my point?
We want a FAIR world,
Which is fair enough
We want a world where we have together discovered, and agreed on certain rules — and than OBSERVE those rules, abide by them
And hopefully those are good rules
And if you think those rules are unfair — again, fair enough. Go make your own rules.
Just understand that you’re also yourself now being UNFAIR towards those rules you’re renouncing.
Just because you believe that what others believe is WRONG, and “unfair” — doesn’t mean that you yourself are NOT UNFAIR in breaking those rules
Which one of you is unfair? You both are. Because you both have different systems of rules, which render both of you breaking some of those rules
Finally,
We want a FAIR world,
But RANDOM does NOT mean UNFAIR
It’s only RANDOM
We want to get rid of the UNFAIR.
If you believe someone is breaking the rules you agreed with them, cheating you — you discontinue the relationship
If we believe someone is breaking the rules of the community — he is excluded. He is fired, or removed from membership, or exiled, or fucking imprisoned, or killed
This is what we do when we KNOW someone breaks our rules
But if it’s RANDOM — then we DON’T KNOW
Furthermore
“RANDOM” is neutral,
Or even positive
If “random” undercuts the RULES you established — it could be considered negative.
However from my point of view: it merely signifies that your RULES failed to account for that randomness.
In which case this randomness is merely neutral. It’s merely an intrinsic feature of reality
Finally, “random” could be viewed as positive — if it’s positively integrated within some system of rules
E.g. the unpredictable benefits of technological breakthroughs
So you have THE RANDOM — which by definition fails to “adhere to rules” (because rules are predictive, deterministic — and this one is random, unpredictable) — but this RANDOMNESS ELEMENT EXISTING is predicted in meta-rules, e.g. RULES PREDICT RANDOM EVENTS OCCURRING
So it DOES adhere to rules
Finally,
Besides randomness — there will of course be CONFLICTS between different systems of RULES:
-Law
-Morality
-God’s law
-Rules of your organisation
-Rules in your relationship
-Your own code
etc
So this is the last reason why you must be profoundly careful with the word “UNFAIR”
Because ACCORDING TO WHAT STANDARDS is it unfair?
If you haven’t agreed on the standard — then how can you agree on what is fair and what is not?
What’s my point?
Now here’s my fucking point:
99% of conversations about what’s FAIR and what’s NOT fair:
-Is confused about the RULES
-Regards RANDOMNESS as “UNFAIR” — rather than neutral, or even feature of the fair
Now don’t get me wrong. I said 99% of conversations. I didn’t say world is 99% unfair
Because ultimately, we DO end up PLAYING BY THE RULES,
-Breaking the law tends to be sub-optimal strategy for life — therefore most of us don’t break it… much
-Deceiving others, NOT keeping your word — tends to terminate relationships — before full value has been extracted from them. Or even ends up being a net negative (e.g. you’re sued, or beat the fuck up)
-Lying is shockingly effective recently, I’m afraid — but it’s just the mark of modernity, where no one believes anything anyway. I dream for the time where liars get instantly excluded from the society (and spontaneously and bottom up).
-Finally there are the rules of physics, rules of software that we use, driving rules, etc… and we DEFER to those rules — simply because it would be NONSENSICAL NOT TO — and utterly adverse to our goals
We DO play by the agreed rules, most of the time
We just TALK a lot about all those cases where we believe this is unfair and that is unfair, blablabla
Here’s what I think,
Spend more time observing the ACTUAL RULES
Then finding the most OPTIMAL PLAN to navigate, according to those rules, according to that map
Verify and master this plan by putting it in action
And if you’re doing well achieving goals you set out for — you can slowly start TALKING about your “rules” and your “ideas”,
And what you think are GOOD rules
And thence — what you think is “FAIR”, and what is “UNFAIR” — in respect to those GOOD RULES, which you yourself have tested,
AND if the rules you tacitly accepted, because you were born INTO that system — are corroborated further by your experiences — then perhaps you can vouch for them
And if they are challenged by your experiences — then I’m afraid exceptional claims require exceptional proof — therefore you will be needed to do a lot more testing and learning, before you are in position to actually suggest something better
At which point you will INDEED make but a suggestion,
You will not say that “RULES are stupid”, and it’s all “UNFAIR”,
Because such criticism is destructive, and you want to be constructive
So once you open your mouth — it will be your ideas of actual improvements — which you have already tested
This is what I believe you should do — before you utter the words: “it’s NOT FAIR”