Apr 12, 2022 04:27 PM
(This post was last modified: Apr 12, 2022 04:28 PM by C C.)
Chance is all: How to evolve the social contract
https://www.3-16am.co.uk/articles/chance...mes-series
INTRO: Brian Skyrms is an expert in the evolution of conventions and the social contract now, inductive logic, decision theory, rational deliberation, the metaphysics of logical atomism, causality, and Truth. Here he discusses social dynamics /cultural evolution vs rational choice traditions, replicator dynamics modelling, Darwin vs rational choice theories, the role of correlation, game theories and Stag Hunts, equilibrium and the need to keep things real, signalling, David Lewis, Shannon and Kullback, learning and learning with invention, signalling networks, plus some issues of utilitarianism... (MORE - details)
EXCERPTS: 'A naturalized social contract theory should try to model man as he really is. I see evolutionary game theory as the best tool we have for that job. Evolutionary dynamics may or may not lead to what rational choice would consider an equilibrium.'
'I like the Stag Hunt and I think it deserves more attention than Prisoner’s Dilemma, but I would not rest social contract theory on one game. A real social contract is a complex web of social norms and conventions. We can try to gain insight by isolating some classes of important social interactions, modeling them as games, and studying the games.'
'Simple signaling networks can do computations and perform inferences. Complex signaling networks driven by reinforcement learning have beaten human experts at chess, go and poker. Fred Dretske argued for a reorientation of Epistemology, away from defining knowledge to the study of the flow of information. Anyone who takes the Dretske program seriously needs to think about signaling networks.'
Why virtue signalling is not just a vice, but an evolved tool
https://aeon.co/essays/why-virtue-signal...olved-tool
INTRO: As a quick stroll on social media reveals, most people love showing that they are good. Whether by expressing compassion for disaster victims, sharing a post to support a social movement, or denouncing a celebrity’s racist comment, many people are eager to broadcast their high moral standing.
Critics sometimes dismiss these acts as mere ‘virtue signalling’. As the British journalist James Bartholomew (who popularised the term in a magazine article in 2015) remarks, virtue signallers enjoy the privilege of feeling better about themselves by doing very little. Unlike the kind of helping where you have to do something – help an old lady cross the street, volunteer to give meals to the dispossessed, go door-to-door to fundraise for a cause – virtue signalling often consists of completely costless actions, such as changing your profile picture or saying you don’t like a politician’s stance on immigration. Bartholomew complains that ‘saying the right things violently on Twitter is much easier than real kindness’.
Virtue signalling can be easy – but why does that make it seem bad?
To answer this question, and understand virtue signalling in general, we need to take a couple of steps backs. In everyday discourse, the people who accuse others of virtue signalling are often not interested in doing real moral analysis – mostly, they want to discredit their political opponents. My allies are heroically rallying for a just cause, people on the other side are virtue signalling. It might be more illuminating to look at what science says on the subject. Why do we have the strong emotions we have about virtue signalling, and is it actually good or bad?
Over the past few decades, scientists in a variety of fields have developed sophisticated analyses of signalling as a general phenomenon – how humans (and other animals) send signals designed to convey information to other individuals. The insights of signalling theory can be counterintuitive, and have had a huge impact on biology and the social sciences. They also tell us that virtue signalling is more nuanced and more interesting than the picture painted by conventional wisdom and political rhetoric. As it turns out, there are bad and good things about virtue signalling – but probably not for the reasons you think... (MORE- details)
https://www.3-16am.co.uk/articles/chance...mes-series
INTRO: Brian Skyrms is an expert in the evolution of conventions and the social contract now, inductive logic, decision theory, rational deliberation, the metaphysics of logical atomism, causality, and Truth. Here he discusses social dynamics /cultural evolution vs rational choice traditions, replicator dynamics modelling, Darwin vs rational choice theories, the role of correlation, game theories and Stag Hunts, equilibrium and the need to keep things real, signalling, David Lewis, Shannon and Kullback, learning and learning with invention, signalling networks, plus some issues of utilitarianism... (MORE - details)
EXCERPTS: 'A naturalized social contract theory should try to model man as he really is. I see evolutionary game theory as the best tool we have for that job. Evolutionary dynamics may or may not lead to what rational choice would consider an equilibrium.'
'I like the Stag Hunt and I think it deserves more attention than Prisoner’s Dilemma, but I would not rest social contract theory on one game. A real social contract is a complex web of social norms and conventions. We can try to gain insight by isolating some classes of important social interactions, modeling them as games, and studying the games.'
'Simple signaling networks can do computations and perform inferences. Complex signaling networks driven by reinforcement learning have beaten human experts at chess, go and poker. Fred Dretske argued for a reorientation of Epistemology, away from defining knowledge to the study of the flow of information. Anyone who takes the Dretske program seriously needs to think about signaling networks.'
Why virtue signalling is not just a vice, but an evolved tool
https://aeon.co/essays/why-virtue-signal...olved-tool
INTRO: As a quick stroll on social media reveals, most people love showing that they are good. Whether by expressing compassion for disaster victims, sharing a post to support a social movement, or denouncing a celebrity’s racist comment, many people are eager to broadcast their high moral standing.
Critics sometimes dismiss these acts as mere ‘virtue signalling’. As the British journalist James Bartholomew (who popularised the term in a magazine article in 2015) remarks, virtue signallers enjoy the privilege of feeling better about themselves by doing very little. Unlike the kind of helping where you have to do something – help an old lady cross the street, volunteer to give meals to the dispossessed, go door-to-door to fundraise for a cause – virtue signalling often consists of completely costless actions, such as changing your profile picture or saying you don’t like a politician’s stance on immigration. Bartholomew complains that ‘saying the right things violently on Twitter is much easier than real kindness’.
Virtue signalling can be easy – but why does that make it seem bad?
To answer this question, and understand virtue signalling in general, we need to take a couple of steps backs. In everyday discourse, the people who accuse others of virtue signalling are often not interested in doing real moral analysis – mostly, they want to discredit their political opponents. My allies are heroically rallying for a just cause, people on the other side are virtue signalling. It might be more illuminating to look at what science says on the subject. Why do we have the strong emotions we have about virtue signalling, and is it actually good or bad?
Over the past few decades, scientists in a variety of fields have developed sophisticated analyses of signalling as a general phenomenon – how humans (and other animals) send signals designed to convey information to other individuals. The insights of signalling theory can be counterintuitive, and have had a huge impact on biology and the social sciences. They also tell us that virtue signalling is more nuanced and more interesting than the picture painted by conventional wisdom and political rhetoric. As it turns out, there are bad and good things about virtue signalling – but probably not for the reasons you think... (MORE- details)