From: Hagbard Celine (hagbard@ix.netcom.com)
Date: Fri Jun 20 1997 - 12:41:13 MDT
Kennita Watson wrote:
>
> Hagbard:
> >I agree that many people are often risk-averse. However this is still a
> >function of imperfect information. Why does one choose not to invest in
> >a new software firm? Because he doesn't know that the firm will
> >eventually be Microsoft. In the same way, a person who decides not to
> >risk a drive to the beach because it may rain, only wishes he knew more
> >about weather systems when it turns out to be a beautiful day. IMO,
> >people are inherently self-aggrandizing (as I have offered before on
> >this list), and if they *KNOW* they will be increased by a certain
> >change in situation, skill, or whatever, they *WILL* accept the change,
> >and quite often, pursue it for themselves.
>
> Careful. People *KNOW* many things that are false,
Point noted and appreciated. However I'm not even considering
information that is false. If one knows false information I concede that
this is entirely worthless. But at the same time, if one knows true
information, I'm suggesting that as that kind of information increases,
people will be less risk-averse. The conclusion is that perfect
information about all things (omniscience) leads to perfect behavior.
Risk becomes irrelevant.
> and it is not
> possible to know the future with 100% certainty.
You're right. But I'll take 99.9% certainty as good enough.
> The main thing that
> people seem not to know is how probability and statistics and risk
> work,
I think you're saying that the more information people have about such
things, the better they will perform. If so, this is precisely my point.
> and what they most seem to aggrandize is what they will lose on
> a given down side.
I'm not sure what you're saying here.
> Surveys show that many (most?) people are more
> afraid of public speaking than of death.
Is public speaking a risk? I think so, in a certain way. Now, I'm not
sure that the only reason people are afraid of public speaking is
risk-aversion. I figure self-confidence (a purely mental construction)
is the primary basis. Indeed, when I get up in court, the more
information I have about the law and the facts of the case, the more I
look forward to my argument. Again, where information increases,
risk-aversion decreases, the more sure of yourself you become.
> A given person can be an optimist in the face of scanty information,
> or a pessimist in the face of extensive information. I think most
> people tend towards pessimism, and others towards optimism.
I personally tend towards cynicism. But this only because I'm a stark
optomist. I have such a feeling that mankind is capable of everything
that I can't help a certain arrogance towards the people who are running
our world into the ground.
> I tell
> some people everything I know about cryonics and they say "What if
> it doesn't work?". My reply: "Maybe it won't, but then nothing's
> changed. The point is, what if it _does_?".
And that, my extropian friend, is indeed the point.
Boat drinks (check out Things to Do in Denver When You're Dead for an
explaination of this farewell...),
Hagbard
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 01 2002 - 14:44:30 MST