I think I also buy the evolved-intelligence-should-be-myopic argument, even though we have only one data point, and don’t need the evolutionary argument to lend support to what direct observation already shows in our case.
So, I can’t see why this is downvoted except that it’s somewhat of a tangent.
Even if the “paranoid fantasies” have consderable substance, would still usually be better (for your genes) to concentrate on producing offspring. Averting disaster is a “tragedy of the commons” situation. Free riding—and letting someone else do that—may well reap the benefits without paying the costs.
Your last sentence seems true.
I think I also buy the evolved-intelligence-should-be-myopic argument, even though we have only one data point, and don’t need the evolutionary argument to lend support to what direct observation already shows in our case.
So, I can’t see why this is downvoted except that it’s somewhat of a tangent.
Well, I wasn’t really claiming that “evolved-intelligence-should-be-myopic”.
Evolved-intelligence is what we have, and it can predict the future—at least a little:
http://alife.co.uk/essays/evolution_sees/
Even if the “paranoid fantasies” have consderable substance, would still usually be better (for your genes) to concentrate on producing offspring. Averting disaster is a “tragedy of the commons” situation. Free riding—and letting someone else do that—may well reap the benefits without paying the costs.