Ah, I hadn’t read the link. I still think this is pretty much signaling of conformity/membership and not anything more. I think the author undervalues many people’s desire to belong, though. The idea that people care significantly more about property rights than dress codes can easily be disproven by shoplifting a candy bar, then attempting to purchase one while naked.
There is competition between genes promoting exploitation (free-loading) and genes preventing being exploited (promoting conformity). Humans are Adaptation Executors so this is not about understanding what is better game-theoretically but feeling (having some instinct, drive, affect) something that leads to the adaptive behavior. Belonging is a feeling related to promoting collaboration and somehow that includes the willingness to follow even silly rules.
Yeah, “functional value” is too simplistic. The original article defines silly rules as
But I see this as distinct from status signaling. Maybe we need a typology of signaling.
Ah, I hadn’t read the link. I still think this is pretty much signaling of conformity/membership and not anything more. I think the author undervalues many people’s desire to belong, though. The idea that people care significantly more about property rights than dress codes can easily be disproven by shoplifting a candy bar, then attempting to purchase one while naked.
You’re comparing a minimal property rights violation with a maximal dress code violation.
That’s what it feels from the inside.
There is competition between genes promoting exploitation (free-loading) and genes preventing being exploited (promoting conformity). Humans are Adaptation Executors so this is not about understanding what is better game-theoretically but feeling (having some instinct, drive, affect) something that leads to the adaptive behavior. Belonging is a feeling related to promoting collaboration and somehow that includes the willingness to follow even silly rules.