= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
Jack comments on Selfishness Signals Status - LessWrong
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 (89)
Note that these only work if the group also knows that the person is capable of all these low-status indicators. For example, slouching, not understanding social-niceties and manners, not being able to converse, not being able to afford nice clothes or have the sense of fashion to pick decent sets, or not having anything worth showing off are all low-status indicators. It's demonstrating the option, not the necessity of these behaviors that is high-status.
That is why I say: Selfishness signals status.
The inference goes: surface features -> detecting the presence of optimization for self-pleasure -> high status
It could have also gone: surface features -> detecting poverty/incompetence -> low status
But the former is what I mean by "selfishness".
I think it might be more basic like: x gets away with breaking norm y -> x is high status. But alright
Could this possibly explain people being put off by homeless people, etc.?
Because they are breaking norms (wearing nice clothes, being clean, etc.) they are seen as demonstrating high status, but they clearly are not. So they are exceeding their status and should be shunned?
It is the getting away with it part that suggests high status. Not getting away with it is low status to the extreme!
There are two levels of "getting away with it."
That is, while they may not be "getting away with it" in other people's eyes, they aren't appropriately embarrassed by their extreme low status.