Humanities desk | ||
---|---|---|
< November 10 | << Oct | November | Dec >> | November 12 > |
Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities Reference Desk Archives |
---|
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages. |
Selfish gene theory, combined with the number, strength, scope and prevalence of the various biases at List of cognitive biases, strongly suggests to me that non-calculative human behaviour is in general a very poor approximation of what is optimal, and therefore cannot maximize utility even within human computational limits, contra indirect-consequentialist theories such as two-level utilitarianism. Does this objection have a name, and what are the usual answers to it? Neon Merlin 05:56, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
I know it was not legal a while ago, but when it started to be officially legal? Miss Bono [hello, hello!] 17:56, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
I'm trying to think of a name and recall the tale of a man, possibly a king. He was said to have gone down to the sea to fight with it. He stood in the water and beat at it with his sword, or something to that effect. He's often used as an allegory of someone trying to fight a hopeless fight. Anyone know who this is? Dismas| (talk) 20:25, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
Humanities desk | ||
---|---|---|
< November 10 | << Oct | November | Dec >> | November 12 > |
Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities Reference Desk Archives |
---|
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages. |
Selfish gene theory, combined with the number, strength, scope and prevalence of the various biases at List of cognitive biases, strongly suggests to me that non-calculative human behaviour is in general a very poor approximation of what is optimal, and therefore cannot maximize utility even within human computational limits, contra indirect-consequentialist theories such as two-level utilitarianism. Does this objection have a name, and what are the usual answers to it? Neon Merlin 05:56, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
I know it was not legal a while ago, but when it started to be officially legal? Miss Bono [hello, hello!] 17:56, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
I'm trying to think of a name and recall the tale of a man, possibly a king. He was said to have gone down to the sea to fight with it. He stood in the water and beat at it with his sword, or something to that effect. He's often used as an allegory of someone trying to fight a hopeless fight. Anyone know who this is? Dismas| (talk) 20:25, 11 November 2013 (UTC)