= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
hyporational comments on You can't signal to rubes - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (115)
I agree. Thanks for the relevant link. Now I just wish you would've made this comment directly on the op.
ISTM that the OP actually meant that cognitively rather than just evolutionarily; see this comment.
Why did he use the peacock as an example then? Does it make sense to use the word signaling on both sides of the boundary, especially if you're trying to constrain the concept?
I meant the peacock example evolutionarily. I got it from The Selfish Gene.
I thought so. I think it might be useful to have a different word for signaling on each side of the e-c boundary, since signaling clearly can't mean the same thing on both sides.
Why not? Can't we regard evolutionary signalling as completely analogous to cognitive signalling, just as played by genes over a much longer time scale?