drafting Human Diversity review (Monday)

diff --git a/content/drafts/book-review-human-diversity.md b/content/drafts/book-review-human-diversity.md
index 929c47c..e410160 100644 (file)
--- a/content/drafts/book-review-human-diversity.md
+++ b/content/drafts/book-review-human-diversity.md
@@ -80,10 +80,13 @@ Okay, maybe that was a bad example; topology in general really is kind of a mind
 
 In any case, as soon as we start to ask questions _about humans_—and far more so _identifiable groups_ of humans—we end up entering the domain of _politics_.
 
-We really _shouldn't_. Everyone _should_ perceive a common interest in true beliefs—maps that reflect the territory, [simple theories](https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/f4txACqDWithRi7hs/occam-s-razor) that [predict our observations](https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/a7n8GdKiAZRX86T5A/making-beliefs-pay-rent-in-anticipated-experiences)—because beliefs that make accurate predictions are _useful_ for making good decisions. That's what "beliefs" are _for_, evolutionarily speaking: my analogues in humanity's environment of evolutionary adaptedness were better off believing that (say) there were good hunting grounds to the north _if and only if_ there were _actually_ good hunting grounds to the north.
+We really _shouldn't_. Everyone _should_ perceive a common interest in true beliefs—maps that reflect the territory, [simple theories](https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/f4txACqDWithRi7hs/occam-s-razor) that [predict our observations](https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/a7n8GdKiAZRX86T5A/making-beliefs-pay-rent-in-anticipated-experiences)—because beliefs that make accurate predictions are _useful_ for making good decisions. That's what "beliefs" are _for_, evolutionarily speaking: my analogues in humanity's environment of evolutionary adaptedness were better off believing that (say) the berries from some bush were good to eat if and only if the berries were _actually_ good to eat. If my analogues unduly-optimistically thought the berries were good when they actually weren't, they'd get sick (and lose fitness), but if they unduly-pessimistically thought the berries were not good when they actually were, they'd miss out on valuable calories (and fitness).
 
 (Okay, this story is actually somewhat complicated by the fact that [evolution didn't "figure out" how to build brains](https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/gTNB9CQd5hnbkMxAG/protein-reinforcement-and-dna-consequentialism) that [keep track of probability and utility separately](https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/decision-theory/): my analogues in the environment of evolutionary adaptedness might also have been better off assuming that a rustling in the bush was a tiger, even if it usually wasn't a tiger, because failing to detect actual tigers was so much more costly than erroneously "detecting" an imaginary tiger. But let this pass.)
 
+The problem is that, while any individual should always want true beliefs in order to navigate the world, 
+
+
 
 https://meltingasphalt.com/crony-beliefs/
 

diff --git a/notes/human-diversity-notes.md b/notes/human-diversity-notes.md
index dfb0f86..8aed3c2 100644 (file)
--- a/notes/human-diversity-notes.md
+++ b/notes/human-diversity-notes.md
@@ -126,6 +126,4 @@ defending eugenics: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29804244
 
 A Book Review
 
-_(Content advisory: [politics](https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/9weLK2AJ9JEt2Tt8f/politics-is-the-mind-killer))_
-
 Someone wrote a blog post reviewing a book by some sociologist named Charles Murray. Never heard of him. Anyway, I couldn't get through the whole thing because the reviewer has this really obnoxious writing style that uses way too many italics and exclamation points, but I did notice that he (?) links to _Less Wrong_ a few times (!?), which is something I don't see "in the wild" very often these days, so I thought it couldn't hurt to share the link here in case one of you happens to find it interesting??