Peterdjones comments on How minimal is our intelligence? - Less Wrong

55 Post author: Douglas_Reay 25 November 2012 11:34PM

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

Comments (214)

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

Comment author: Salemicus 23 November 2012 02:49:44PM *  1 point [-]

Of course people can do things that are self-defeating - did I ever suggest otherwise? I never said people are perfect guardians of their own self-interest, I said, and I repeat, that a random person is a better guardians of his own self-interest than a random do-gooder.

I am getting a little frustrated with people arguing against strawmans of my positions, which has now happened several times on this thread. Am I being unclear?

None of those links suggest that people are worse guardians of their own self-interest than the outsider. In fact, quite the reverse. Take the fertilizer study. The reason that the farmers weren't following the advice of the Kenyan Ministry of Agriculture was that it was bad advice. To quote:

[T]he full package recommended by the Ministry of Agriculture is highly unprofitable on average for the farmers in our sample... the official recommendations are not adapted to many farmers in the region.

So the study demonstrates that the farmers were better guardians of their own self-interest than some bureaucrat in Nairobi (no doubt advised by a western NGO). If they had been forced to follow the (no doubt well-meaning) advice, they would have been much worse off. Maybe some would have died. Now, at the same time, they don't know every possible combination, and it turns out that if they changed their farming methodology, they could become more productive. Great! That's how society advances - by persuading people as to what is in their self-interest, not by making someone else their guardian.

Comment author: Peterdjones 23 November 2012 07:58:16PM 0 points [-]

a random person is a better guardians of his own self-interest than a random do-gooder.

That isn't obvious. D-G's are likely to be qualified to help people, the people they are helping are likely to have a hsitory of not helping themselves sucessfully.

So the study demonstrates that the farmers were better guardians of their own self-interest

Would they have had access to fertilizer at all w/out the govt? Two heads are better than one, again.