[ExI] The Argumentative Theory of Reasoning

BillK pharos at gmail.com
Thu Jun 16 10:30:07 UTC 2011

On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 10:50 AM, The Avantguardian  wrote:
> That's not a far-fetched assumption. If one considers quorum sensing and
> chemical messaging by bacteria to be a form of communication then "we" had
> communication a billion years or so before "we" had brains.
> http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/07/090707093619.htm
> When male birds sing can they not be said to be arguing their fitness with one
> another for benefit of the females? Does it matter that they argue intricate
> sound patterns passed down through generations, rather than logical conclusions
> based upon dubious premises?

I don't think so. Birdsong is territorial defence, i.e. fighting.
So you would have to extend the 'arguing' discussion to include
fighting and war.

The article is discussing how reasoning developed in humans and the
associated confirmation bias.
Not everything that humans do is intended to attract the opposite sex.
(At least, I haven't had any offers from displaying my astounding
argumentative skills!)  ;)

Quite the opposite in fact. Long-term marriage partners don't usually
argue much. And you *really* don't want to win a long argument with
your wife. There are disadvantages to winning such an argument.


More information about the extropy-chat mailing list