= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Protagoras comments on Religious dogma as group identity - Less Wrong Discussion
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 (20)
There is certainly some plausibility to the idea that more blatantly silly beliefs make even better in group indicators; I suppose the question is how to test that hypothesis.
There are slightly unethical ways to get some weak evidence on this.
Get two groups, assign one with a irrelevant but silly and the other with a irrelevant but not silly belief as their marker. Then have the two groups compete to try and recruit a limited pool of preselected people to their cause. Then set up a game where numbers help, but defection is possible and hurts the team quite a bit, and let people know this.
Its slightly unethical because it has some potential to go nasty as some previous experiments on blue vs. green have.