I hate doing favors for people, I really do. Not just any people, even I'd hate helping my mom or SO.
Why? The reasoning goes like this...
I believe that today all the information outthere is available online to almost anyone. Most of the people approach me with questions for which answers could be found easily online, albeit after a little bit of research and time investment. Typical examples are computer related issues: people just don't want to lose time themselves with computers or are plain lazy or even worse stupid and not able to find information online so they approach for help.
Now whatever the motivation is, there is no appropriate incentive for me to help since:
-I know already the stuff and by redoing it again I am wasting my time and not learning myself
-I am jealous of them not having to put in and waste time of their life resolving some stupid software glitch like I had to when I had to do and learn it myself. I want them to live the same miserable life glued to their screen working and not receiving an instant gratification in an answer
-Other people doing favors for me is usually dependent on me contributing something to them in some way - So if I provide them a 'manual' how to do it themselves, I might become superfluous and not approached for help anymore thus useless; on the other hand if I do it all for them without showing them how, I run in trouble having them wasting my time too often coming back with the same questions
-By "spreading the knowledge" I increase competition thus forcing me to innovate more and learn to stay competitive instead of sleeping under a tree and enjoying being "the guru". This is a perfect counter-incentive
-I believe people invest back in me less than what they take (though it can be just my belief!) - thus from a logical point the best equilibrium for me is to refuse all favors and continue avoiding asking favors from anyone
-People are fast and easy to brag and pull the "And I helped you with..." whenever I openly state I am just lazy to help them
Please help me and identify logical faults in the argument above and convince me that I look at it the wrong way
Why? The reasoning goes like this...
I believe that today all the information outthere is available online to almost anyone. Most of the people approach me with questions for which answers could be found easily online, albeit after a little bit of research and time investment. Typical examples are computer related issues: people just don't want to lose time themselves with computers or are plain lazy or even worse stupid and not able to find information online so they approach for help.
Now whatever the motivation is, there is no appropriate incentive for me to help since:
-I know already the stuff and by redoing it again I am wasting my time and not learning myself
-I am jealous of them not having to put in and waste time of their life resolving some stupid software glitch like I had to when I had to do and learn it myself. I want them to live the same miserable life glued to their screen working and not receiving an instant gratification in an answer
-Other people doing favors for me is usually dependent on me contributing something to them in some way - So if I provide them a 'manual' how to do it themselves, I might become superfluous and not approached for help anymore thus useless; on the other hand if I do it all for them without showing them how, I run in trouble having them wasting my time too often coming back with the same questions
-By "spreading the knowledge" I increase competition thus forcing me to innovate more and learn to stay competitive instead of sleeping under a tree and enjoying being "the guru". This is a perfect counter-incentive
-I believe people invest back in me less than what they take (though it can be just my belief!) - thus from a logical point the best equilibrium for me is to refuse all favors and continue avoiding asking favors from anyone
-People are fast and easy to brag and pull the "And I helped you with..." whenever I openly state I am just lazy to help them
Please help me and identify logical faults in the argument above and convince me that I look at it the wrong way
