Join 📚 Quinn's Highlights
A batch of the best highlights from what Quinn's read, .
The Expert Identification Problem and the Challenges of Democratic Decision-Making
Key takeaways:
• The expert identification problem is a major concern when it comes to trusting experts in a democracy.
• Democracies aim to harness the intellectual power of diversity for better solutions.
• The challenge lies in recognizing the best solutions when they require expertise that the democratic entity may not possess.
• There is no clear solution to this problem, and democracy remains the best way to organize society according to the speaker.
Transcript:
Speaker 2
So for a long time I would say that the problem I've been most obsessed with is something I call the expert identification problem it's like how does the non-expert figure out which expert To trust if they don't have the expertise and one of the worries about a democracy is that it runs straight into the expert identification problem right like if we're democratically Voting on what to do we are aggregate non-experts I mean I'm not talking here about like oh we are the experts and you all are not even if you are the world expert in X you're a non-expert In a million other fields right so as an aggregate we are non-expert so here's the real worry for me if you have the right solution how would that get democratically approved Helen Landemore Is this a political theorist I really like she's part of a movement who are epistemic democrats and they think that democracies are the best way to harness the intellectual power of Diversity and the basic model is something like diverse people will come up with a better set of solutions and when you put them together the best solutions will rise to the top and my Worry is how will the democratic entity recognize which are the best solutions because if the best solution requires expertise to recognize and the democratic entity as an aggregate Is not an expert how will they figure it out and that's a problem I'm not sure there's a solution to and I also can't think of a better way to organize the world than democratically
Paul Smaldino & C. Thi Nguyen on Problems With Value Metrics & Governance at Scale
COMPLEXITY: Physics of Life
Layers of Information Continually Accumulate *Within* Objects Over Time
Summary:
Information can be shared between objects as evidence of a common history, indicating that objects are deeply rooted in time.
As the biosphere has evolved, it has increased the layers of information processing and abstraction, resulting in the generation of objects that are deeper in time. Consequently, some features of these objects appear less physical and more abstract.
Each individual accumulates information over time, making parts of them brand new and parts billions of years old.
Transcript:
Speaker 1
And so information we talked about has a sort of interesting property that seems very abstract. And it seems to be that information can move between objects, like we're speaking the same language, but when you can share information between objects like you and I speaking, what That is is evidence of a common history. These things that we call information and abstractions, I think, are just evidence that these objects are actually deep in time. So things look more abstract, the deeper and timely are. And it's one of the reasons I think that as the biosphere has evolved over time, it's increased the layers of information processing and abstraction that it's built. But really what it is is you're generating these objects that are deeper and deeper in time. And so some of their features look less and less physical because they're not physical now, they're physical in the structure that's extended in time.
Speaker 2
You have a lovely line in one of your papers where you say that each of us are our own age, but in many ways, we're thousands and thousands of years old because we have accumulated all that Information instead of genes to be who we are today.
Speaker 1
That's right. So parts of you are brand new. And parts of us are all brand new from this conversation because we've exchanged information and generated new structures. Parts of us are billions of years old.
Big Ideas — Time
Simplifying Complexity
The tension between the ambiguity of individuals' goals and large scale collective organization
Transcript:
Speaker 2
Here's the pessimistic nightmare. It is really good and healthy for human beings to live in an ambiguous environment with a pluralistic set of goals, many of which are in Kuwait. That is an essential tension with the methods of large scale collective organization. If it's true that for an organization to cohere, it needs to have clear policies so it can act coherently, then we should not expect that kind of ambiguity to survive at scale. And I think what you're describing, so I tend to think about since I'm a philosopher like what makes something constitutively coherent. And what you're describing is a kind of evolutionary process. You know, some organizations are going to be more coherent than others and some people are more interested in coherence. And the people that are more interested in following the strict outcome are going to arise in the organization. And the organizations that have clear outcomes are going to be better at achieving those outcomes. And so our world is going to be full of large organizations staffed with people that have very, very clear specifications of outcomes. And there's something inhumane and bad about that for individuals. But that's what happens when we need to organize in large scale collectives.
Paul Smaldino & C. Thi Nguyen on Problems With Value Metrics & Governance at Scale
COMPLEXITY: Physics of Life
...catch up on these, and many more highlights
Readwise