CronoDAS comments on The strongest status signals - Less Wrong

-1 Post author: pwno 06 March 2010 08:13AM

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

Comments (46)

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

Comment author: pwno 06 March 2010 08:12:58PM 0 points [-]

To use an extreme example, when the President of the US goes into a small-town diner and chats with the "regular folks" there, he's not lowering his status. He's signaling, "My status is so high, I can pal around with whoever I want." Yes, this raises the status of those he talks to. (It also raises the President's status.)

This is not the best example because a president's institutionally granted power is a function of how likable and popular he is with the people. Imagine, however, that the president was more of a dictator and didn't need his citizen's approval. In this case, he'd be lowering his status by chatting with regular folk. He's signaling he still cares enough to chat with them despite having this unalterable power over them. Consequently, the citizens believe they must have some power over the dictator (however little).

Comment author: CronoDAS 06 March 2010 08:38:36PM 1 point [-]

What about countersignaling? ;)

Comment author: pwno 06 March 2010 08:45:03PM *  -1 points [-]

Gonna get downvoted for this, but I don't believing counter-signaling is a useful abstraction - there's just signaling, period. The reason counter-signaling (as conventionally defined) may raise your status is because it displays indifference or less reactivity.

Comment author: wedrifid 06 March 2010 10:50:16PM 3 points [-]

Gonna get downvoted for this

Downvoted for that.

Counter-signalling is a useful abstraction, so long as it is understood that it is a strict subset of 'signalling'.

Comment author: pwno 06 March 2010 10:57:11PM 2 points [-]

Fair enough.