[ExI] evolution and crazy thinking

[William Flynn Wallace]

​
 So Evolution gave us some rules of thumb that are fast and work pretty
well most of the time, but like all rules of thumb they sometimes can go
badly wrong.  John (thanks also to spike)

John!  You did not have to be a physicist.  You coulda been a psychologist!
I cast out my bait and hook two big thinkers.

My problem with these algorithms - they are patches.  Maybe they were the
best that dna could come up with at the time, and as John says, they work
sometimes, mainly to maintain the status quo.  That's where my contrarian
mind balks.

The algorithms/patches are not, by far, nuanced thinking.  Thus I think
that they are unworthy of advanced minds who will lead the culture, whether
it be scientific or something else ( I see no evidence that advanced minds
are leading popular culture).  They do distort reality and need
improvement, or in many cases, disposal.

But I do recognize that perhaps it could be argued that they were needed in
some form.  Tribal level, I think.

Evolution did a great job but it has a long way to go.  I hope it gets the
chance.  'Survival of the fittest' does not seem to describe the current
state of world affairs in the evolutionary sense.
​Are we, in fact, not losing the unfit?

bill w​

On Sat, Jul 14, 2018 at 11:48 AM, Spike Jones <spike at rainier66.com> wrote:

​
​
 If common cog biases somehow benefit the tribe, or the species, or
promotes copulation (even at the expense of the individual) it can explain
why they persist in humans.​


> ​I guess that to refine my question might help:  Just how do the biases
> help?   It is very easy to see how such things as lying (not a cognitive
> bias) can be very beneficial.  It is much harder, impossible to me in fact,
> to see how irrational thinking done by an individual can help his or her
> survival.​
>
>
​By the group, yes.  Religion, for one, is irrational - some prefer
nonrational - but does help group cohesion in certain ways​.

>
>
> *From:* extropy-chat <extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org> *On Behalf
> Of *William Flynn Wallace
> *Sent:* Saturday, July 14, 2018 8:10 AM
> *To:* ExI chat list <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
> *Subject:* [ExI] evolution and crazy thinking
>
>
>
> >…Pondering for the nth time about why humans got so far with all the
> crazy, illogical cognitive gadgets that inhabit our forebrains.  I have
> repeatedly mentioned to this group the cognitive errors or biases listed in
> Wikipedia.
>
>
>
> …
>
>
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cognitive_biases
>
>
>
> …>bill w
>
>
>
>
>
> Billw, cog biases can be explained using evolutionary psychology, but one
> needs to call upon the controversial notion of group selection.  Strong
> arguments have been promoted that evolution only works on the individual
> level.  I would argue that to explain easily-verifiable observations, such
> as cognitive biases, we must acknowledge that evolutionary selection does
> work at the group level, not just families, but particularly there.
>
>
>
> Clarification: group selection works in those species which do work as
> groups.  Alligators and flies and such: not.  Lions, bees, orcas, humans,
> yes.  Humans compete against other species, against other tribes, against
> each other and compete at the gene level.
> ​​
> If common cog biases somehow benefit the tribe, or the species, or
> promotes copulation (even at the expense of the individual) it can explain
> why they persist in humans.
>
>
>
> spike
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20180717/b6582e90/attachment.html>