by theNewMicrosoft on 10/18/23, 5:25 PM with 19 comments
by enoch_r on 10/18/23, 6:46 PM
> “The world is really screwed up and made much, much more unfair by the fact that we reward people and punish people for things they have no control over,” Sapolsky said. “We’ve got no free will. Stop attributing stuff to us that isn’t there.”
I don't how much the reporter has embellished things but this seems really, really, really silly.
"People have no free will" does not mean that "incentives don't matter." Obviously, or we could simply prove that free will exists by noting that incentives do, in fact, matter.
Would more people create Ponzi schemes if they didn't have examples like Madoff and SBF of it all crashing down? Absolutely. Would more people steal if they knew they couldn't face punishment? Yes. Would more people drink and drive if there were no consequences for doing so? Yes. If Company A offers me more money than Company B, am I more likely to take the offer from Company A? Yes.
Given that incentives matter, it is absolutely fair and reasonable to "reward people and reward people" for their actions.
Even though I think the premise that people don't have free will is likely correct!
(It's also quite odd that Sapolsky would ask people to change their behavior, given his apparent beliefs...)
by s1artibartfast on 10/18/23, 6:27 PM
Lack of free will does not remove accountability for one's actions. An individual is a good or bad actor by the nature of their actions and behavior.
Similarly, a lack of free will does not mean predetermination or predictability.
To build a 100% accurate predictive model, you would have to duplicate the world and play it forward in time. This mean the events would have to actually happen before you can predict them.
by haltist on 10/18/23, 7:11 PM
by yellow_postit on 10/18/23, 5:34 PM
by paulpauper on 10/18/23, 5:55 PM
by mensetmanusman on 10/18/23, 6:01 PM