[extropy-chat] Examining Risks (was RE: META: List Quality)

[Hal Finney]

Lee writes:
> It's mainly a matter of risk perception, I think. The current
> debate over the sale of the Port Authority to the UAE is a
> near-perfect microcosm. We see how most of us have intuitively
> jumped to certain conclusions, regardless of how little we 
> happened to know ahead of time about the actual systems and
> factors involved!  Yet, is that a *completely* bad thing to
> do?
>
> I must hasten to say that I'm not looking for an argument
> about petty politics at all, but what *is* nearest to my
> concern---what I am almost literally dying to discuss---is
> the role of rationality vs. intuition in cases like this
> as well as in cases not like this.  I want very very much
> to understand the absolutely vital role that rationality
> has to play in human decision making, and, if they exist,
> its limitations.

My problem with this direction of questioning is as follows.  What
difference does my opinion make?  Why should I care about whether Dubai
runs some port?  Last time I checked, George Bush wasn't on the phone
asking for my help.  The nation is not collectively holding its breath
to find out what Hal Finney thinks about the matter.  So why should I
bother to become informed about this issue, or any of the other grand
political questions which our civilization must address?  Events will
take their course independent of my views.

Worse, it's not clear that studying available information and coming up
with an informed opinion would be significantly likely to move me closer
to the truth.  These are hard questions even for those who have lots
of information about them, as demonstrated by the diversity of opinion
among experts.  It looks to me like it's pretty random what position
I would come up with if I became equally as informed, since apparently
both strong support and strong opposition are consistent with intimate
acquaintance with the facts.

Of course, if people find studying and debating such issues to be an
enjoyable hobby, like building ships in bottles, that's fine with me.
If it gives you pleasure, go for it.  But don't pretend that the one
hobby is of any greater importance or significance than the other.

So here is the real problem: society does need some mechanism to make
decisions on grand questions, but it's not rational for the typical
member of society to become informed enough to have a meaningful opinion
on these matters.  So what do we do?  Well, one thing that happens is
in a democracy, politicians lose their jobs when things get worse, and
keep them when things get better.  This tends to happen whether it is
the politician's fault or not, which may seem unjust.  But it does give
them incentives to try to keep things getting better.  That's not such
a bad way to run a world.

Hal