Quote from: Hyperme.sh on September 17, 2017, 08:23:08 AM

Quote from: Hyperme.sh on September 16, 2017, 08:44:03 AM

The masses want a safe environment that allows them to steal from the system in a politically correct way which makes them feel smug about stealing. The power vacuum has always been that TPTB use the masses to attack their competitors and take control of the system, while feeding the masses the debt collectivist lie. Everyone is always trying to find a way to best game the system. Civilization is a crab bucket clusterfuck of defection.

I was asked via private message if I could refute the above quote.

The power vacuum is simply a scaled up version of a prisoners dilemma. It is a situation where rational actors will make choices that improve their own short term position that result in an inferior overall outcome for society as a whole.

The only solution to a prisoners dilemma type problem is change the character of the masses over time. You must transform the masses into superrational actors as this is the only way to escape a rational defect-defect equilibrium.

Quote from: CoinCube on September 10, 2017, 01:28:08 AM

Economics and game theory are ultimately driven by morality and ethics. To highlight this let's look at the classic and famous example of the prisoners dilemmas and its Nash equilibrium.

The prisoner's dilemma is the standard example of game theory where two rational individuals will not cooperate despite it being in their best interest to do so.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prisoner%27s_dilemma

Quote from: Wikipedia

Two members of a criminal gang are arrested and imprisoned. Each prisoner is in solitary confinement with no means of communicating with the other. The prosecutors lack sufficient evidence to convict the pair on the principal charge.

They hope to get both sentenced to a year in prison on a lesser charge. Simultaneously, the prosecutors offer each prisoner a bargain. Each prisoner is given the opportunity either to: betray the other by testifying that the other committed the crime, or to cooperate with the other by remaining silent.

The offer is:
If A and B each betray the other, each of them serves 2 years in prison

If A betrays B but B remains silent, A will be set free and B will serve 3 years in prison (and vice versa)

If A and B both remain silent, both of them will only serve 1 year in prison (on the lesser charge)

It is implied that the prisoners will have no opportunity to reward or punish their partner other than the prison sentences they get

The prisoners dilemma leads rational actors to logically betray each other leading to a suboptimal low cooperation outcome. Betrayal and failure to cooperate is the Nash Equilibrium of the prisoners dilemma.

A Nash equilibrium of this sort, however, is a failure that only binds "rational" individuals. All that is needed to escape from this trap is to elevate the nature of the participants and make them superrational.

Superrationality
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superrationality

Quote

In economics and game theory, a participant is considered to have superrationality (or renormalized rationality) if they have perfect rationality (and thus maximize their own utility) but assume that all other players are superrational too and that a superrational individual will always come up with the same strategy as any other superrational thinker when facing the same symmetrical problem. Applying this definition, a superrational player playing against a superrational opponent in a prisoner's dilemma will cooperate while a rationally self-interested player would defect.
...
Superrationality is a form of Immanuel Kant's categorical imperative.
...
Superrationality is an alternative method of reasoning. First, it is assumed that the answer to a symmetric problem will be the same for all the superrational players. Thus the sameness is taken into account before knowing what the strategy will be.
...
(In the prisoners dilemma) two superrational players will both cooperate, since this answer maximizes their payoff.
...
Note that a superrational player playing against a game-theoretic rational player will defect, since the strategy only assumes that superrational players will agree.

If you want to see how superrationality would play out of in the real world just change the players in prisoners dilemma.

Suppose two Christian missionaries are arrested and imprisoned in North Korea for suspected spreading of blasphemy against the Great Leader. Each missionary is in solitary confinement with no means of communicating with the other.

The North Koreans lack sufficient evidence to convict the pair on the principal charge. But can get both sentenced to a year in labor camps on lesser fabricated charges. Simultaneously, the prosecutors offer each missionary a bargain. Each prisoner is given the opportunity either to betray the other by testifying that the other is a Christian missionary, or to remain silent.

Does the Nash Equilibrium still hold? Doubtful most likely the missionaries will stay quiet. They will do so because they are superrational.

Quote from: CoinCube on September 10, 2017, 07:12:12 AM

The prisoners dilemma is a microcosm for a whole host of human and societal interactions.

Superrationality breaks the prisoners out of the dilemma allowing the achievement of optimal cooperative outcomes despite a Nash equilibrium of defection and betrayal. Superrationality itself is just a formalization of Immanuel Kant's categorical imperative.

Kant's categorical imperative:
Act only according to that maxim whereby you can, at the same time, will that it should become a universal law.

The categorical imperative in turn is a valiant but incomplete attempt to codify much older wisdom into a logical framework.

Brett Stevens wrote up a nice article on this deeper religious wisdom and its relationship to the good but imperfect categorical imperative.

Kants categorical imperative, Biblical law and the golden rule
http://www.amerika.org/science/kants-categorical-imperative-biblical-law-and-the-popular-notion-of-the-golden-rule/

Ultimately superrationality is at its heart the logical result of applying ancient religious wisdom to modern problems. It is Ethical Monotheism that teaches us to treat others as ourselves even when dealing with strangers.

Christianity: Matthew 7:12
"So everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets."

Judaism: Hillel the Elder
"What is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow: this is the whole Torah; the rest is the explanation; go and learn."

Islam: Abdullah ibn Amr Al-Ass
"Whoever wishes to be delivered from the fire and enter the garden should die with faith in Allah and the Last Day and should treat the people as he wishes to be treated by them"

Ethical Monotheism is thus directly responsible for a tremendous portion of the progress humanity had made to date as it facilitates cooperative outcomes over competitive defection.

Religion is a the only functional superrationality protocol. It maximizes superrationality and thus positive societal outcomes. It is the only force that enables suspension of defect-defect equilibrium like the power vacuum. When a superrationality protocol is abandoned (widespread rejection of religion) the gradual vice of ever increasing defection sets in and the countdown towards destruction of the society commences.

Quote from: Henning Webb Prentis, Jr

Paradoxically enough, the release of initiative and enterprise made possible by popular self-government ultimately generates disintegrating forces from within. Again and again after freedom has brought opportunity and some degree of plenty, the competent become selfish, luxury-loving and complacent, the incompetent and the unfortunate grow envious and covetous, and all three groups turn aside from the hard road of freedom to worship the Golden Calf of economic security.

The historical cycle seems to be: From bondage to spiritual faith; from spiritual faith to courage; from courage to liberty; from liberty to abundance; from abundance to selfishness; from selfishness to apathy; from apathy to dependency; and from dependency back to bondage once more."

It is moral degradation that leads to bondage for it is moral strengthening that allows free and strong societies to be built in the first place.

This is why Ethical Monotheism is so important and the reason why so much that is good in the world came from the west.

Without it we are reduced to merely rational actors. We become the prisoners who cannot escape the Nash equilibrium of defection and betrayal.

See: Health and Religion for more.