zero_call comments on Fundamentally Flawed, or Fast and Frugal? - Less Wrong

41 Post author: Kaj_Sotala 20 December 2009 03:10PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (74)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Kaj_Sotala 20 December 2009 09:01:16PM *  5 points [-]

Changed tradeoffs. Evolution ‘‘designed’’ the system for operation in one type of environment, but now we wish to deploy it in a very different type of environment

An important question - how changed is the environment, really? Yes, there are plenty of cases where a changed environment is obviously breaking our evolved reasoning algorithms, but I suspect many people might be overstating the difference.

Value discordance. There is a discrepancy between the standards by which evolution measured the quality of her work, and the standards that we wish to apply.

At the risk of falling into a purely semantic discussion, this doesn't mean the algorithms wouldn't be optimal. It just makes them optimized for some other purpose than the one we'd prefer.

Comment author: zero_call 21 December 2009 01:43:31AM *  5 points [-]

One of the fundamental ways the environment has changed locally must be the level of information that we are now able to process. Namely, since writing was invented, we've been able to consume (I would suppose) far more knowledge from far more sources. But, after all, since writing is just like a mimic of speech that we were originally "designed" for, I can't imagine the modern environment is so much different for our built in algorithms for writing. And similarly for many other "modern" aspects of life.

Edit: Interestingly, I suppose books and written information have essentially developed in civilization as a response to the weaknesses of the evolved brain. Thus, many of the deficiencies in our cognitive operations have actually been attacked by civilization. Insofar as the brain was not properly designed, the modern environment has largely been a source of positive, external cognitive optimization/reorganization.

One might propose that the environment has actually become far less challenging in modern times; certainly I haven't had to hunt and kill for food anytime in recent memory. Now, I can live far longer, with much less (positive) stress, I can smoke and drink and damage my mind at will, I have the express ability to become morbidly obese and mentally unhealthy, and so on. I can freely read and absorb widely disseminated propaganda from sources like Hitler, in maybe the worst case scenario. Perhaps the environment has been effectively weakening our internal algorithms through this kind of under usage and exploitation, rather than through any incidental non-optimization.

Comment author: Vladimir_Nesov 21 December 2009 01:58:04AM 4 points [-]

Good point. Civilization allows to use the strengths of our native makeup more efficiently, thus instead of being "disadjusted" because of change since the EEA, in many areas we are more at home than could ever be naturally.