Counter argument: we pay garbagemen more than we pay convenience store clerks because the work is harder and nastier and we have to incentivize them. Thus, we should also expect that we reward warriors with status more than we reward innovators, because market clearing price.https://twitter.com/robinhanson/status/1119949952761978881 …
what matters when explaining why things are as they are is not what economists think, but what the logic of evolutionary selection thinks (and thinks RETROspectively, not prospectively) Did a tribe in 10,000 BC that rewarded innovators more have its genes or memes replicated?
-
-
The evolutionary environment of 2000 AD != that of 10,000 BC. A 1% improvement in bowl carving technology had little effect, but a 1% improvement in battle outcomes did. Further, the benefits were internalized to the genotype of the victorious tribe. Bowl carving tech spreads.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
A tribe in 10K BC internalized a far smaller % of gains from innovation than from war.
-
Right, exactly. So both culturally and genetically, we'd expect humans to optimize for investing in war (offensive or defensive). Given 10k years (100k years?) of this environment, we'd expect the human default to STILL do this. ...and it does.
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.