[ExI] Survival

Jef Allbright jef at jefallbright.net
Thu Jan 3 16:46:21 UTC 2008


On 1/3/08, Stathis Papaioannou <stathisp at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 03/01/2008, Anne Corwin <sparkle_robot at yahoo.com> wrote:
> > For some reason I'm finding this ice-cream speculation terribly amusing.
> >
> > It sounds silly on the surface, but there's a lot of potential for
> > interesting discussion there.  I feel like I *know* I project a "chocolate"
> > signal, but I have no idea *why*.
>
> I would have guessed chocolate, but I'm also not sure exactly why;
> perhaps something to do with quirkiness, vanilla being in general the
> least quirky choice...

The best I can describe it is as a form of very broad pattern
matching, resulting in a probability for the expression of a
particular component of the pattern.

Probably familiar to denizens of this list is the ability to assess
with a quick glance a person's probable orientation on the "Science vs
Humanities" axis.  The clothes and grooming are usually the strongest
signal, supplemented by physical stance, facial (especially ocular)
dynamics, choice and following of visual targets, and on and on.  Up
close, and especially with interaction, choice of words and emphasis
**within context**  tell a broad story of a person's upbringing and
experience, their values and their preferences on many levels.

You may read the above and react with something like "yes, of course"
or perhaps "yes, but it's possible to be completely wrong", but the
key point I offer is that

***************

all of these "signals" necessarily emanate from a coherent whole --
they are **far** from independent.  (This is related to the point I
occasionally try to convey about the difference between probability
and likelihood.)

***************

Related examples include "gaydar."  Or my dog's extreme sensitivity to
mood and context, allowing her to infer meaning (in her limited terms)
with amazing accuracy despite no real language abilities.

Other notable examples are available from the popular book _Blink_,
and Paul Ekman's research on face-reading and deception.

Less reputable (but entertaining) resources include Neural Linguistic
Programming (stripping out the idiocy of the Speed Seduction fanboys
and the blatantly immoral self-promotion of many practitioners), the
art of "cold-reading" (intentionally or unintentionally practiced by
so-called "psychics"), and the impressive acts of Derren Brown (taking
into account manipulation, trickery, and selection of positive
results.)

A related question, of deep practical interest to me, is the
relationship of such probabilistic pattern-matching to issues of
"empathy", which as popularly recognized is an evolved heuristic for
modeling the internal state of intentional others, but quite limited
relative to its potential more developed and technologically amplified
form.

- Jef



More information about the extropy-chat mailing list