[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ontolog-forum] Self Interest Ontology

To: "'[ontolog-forum] '" <ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "Rich Cooper" <rich@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 7 Nov 2011 13:09:57 -0800
Message-id: <0E3C3C8C06F44CA185644FA8343F0F36@Gateway>

Dear Richard,


Thanks for your post.  My comments are below,




Rich Cooper


Rich AT EnglishLogicKernel DOT com

9 4 9 \ 5 2 5 - 5 7 1 2


-----Original Message-----
From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Richard Vines
Sent: Monday, November 07, 2011 11:59 AM
To: '[ontolog-forum] '
Subject: Re: [ontolog-forum] Self Interest Ontology


Despite the open line towards neo conservatism Rich, I read your post as posing a really challenging question for ontologists.


As has been indicated Hayekian notions of self interest in the long run gave us the GFC as the skeletons of regulation were stripped back.


Global financial crisis (GFC)?  That was based on far more complicated issues than JUST self interest.  It is also way past my pay grade to try to explain why the GFC occurred.  I am simply trying to work on the AI issue of embodied self interested agents.  How they aggregate into political structures is way past my yawn limit.  So if my economic views strike you as neo conservative, you are welcome to apply that description for your own purposes, but I really (truly) am not very interested in politics, only in the notion that self interest, when finally explained, will clarify how we individually make decisions.  I want to know how to make an intelligent system that understands its own self interest and uses that to guide its actions in a satisficing way. 


Groups are simply pluralities of people fighting over the crumbs.  I am not particularly interested in politics per se, though others may be and that is their choice. 


So even the neo-conservatives now concede the need for regulatory

interventions. Perhaps the secondary question now is how can regulatory interventions be enacted to prevent the distortions and the gaming that emerge from the long run of the broken glass scenario.


At base level, it would seem we need to take into account the neo conservative agenda to locate the notion of choice, freedom and the like at the heart of any such system. As such, I agree with your conclusions - things evolve (an _expression_ of perhaps deluded hope here about what might evolve!). However, there is an inherent dilemma in this in that individuals will act according to their self-interest, but their self-interest needs to be monitored (and regulated) according to the interests of the collective. With the planet moving towards nearly 7 billion people ....


I agree that SOME regulation is necessary.  We can’t drive on any side of the road we want; letting the strong steal from the weak harms most of us; individuals have rights.  Regulations to manage and enforce basic rights makes sense, but too much regulation is far more likely given the history we have experienced. 


As economics is about secondary consequences, perhaps ontologists are about allowing economic/social etc behaviours / narratives to be seen as they emerge and interact. Pattern based monitoring of large complex evolutionary systems.


And, do this whilst staying true to the neo-conservative tradition above?


Now that will be something to watch with interest!


I don't know how the neo-conservatives can find a way of resolving this

problem of self-interest and the notion of a private life whilst at the same time running regulatory interventions that enshrine the values of personal freedom and choice.


But, in the final analysis, I suppose this is a project we all will have to

co-join somehow. That is why I thought your post was quite interesting.


It is fascinating to watch the workings of a yearning that European

enlightened civility might just be able to deal with the issues of

self-interest at the present time (i.e. Greece etc). It's a mighty

conflicted type of civility at work at the moment and who knows what will evolve from it! But at the end of the day a certain type of civility is

still required as we are all part of the same evolutionary system and now we actually get to shape the nature of these evolutionary processes.


Just out of interest - seen any ontologists' jobs going at the International Monetary Fund? Is this the network for self-interested global re-balancing?  Or should we stick to our knitting in our a-political backyards and then construct fences as well to keep the politics out.


Personally, I think the US constitution, if it were to be applied rigorously, would solve many of those problems, though it would not help the unfortunate who can’t take care of themselves.  I see the modern political issues as descended from the urge to help others through reasonable contributions by each individual in the nation.  I see politics as merely the actions taken by one special interest group at the expense of the commons.  Regulation SHOULD be about preventing harm to the commons from special interests, but it seems instead to be promulgated by the special interests and dressed in rhetoric about helping others, while actually helping the special interests instead. 




-----Original Message-----

From: ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

[mailto:ontolog-forum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Rich Cooper

Sent: Sunday, 6 November 2011 6:32 AM

To: '[ontolog-forum] '

Subject: [ontolog-forum] Self Interest Ontology


Dear Self Interested Ontologists,


I discovered a book written in 1948 that explains why the Keynesian theories

don't work - he describes what he calls the "broken window fallacy" here:





I hope that helps stimulate more discussion of the role of self interest in

AI and in ontology developments.  Moy conclusion is that a true AI system

will have to EVOLVE effectiveness as an ontology of communication among a

plurality of self interested observers. 





Rich Cooper


Rich AT EnglishLogicKernel DOT com

9 4 9 \ 5 2 5 - 5 7 1 2


Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/  
Config Subscr: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/  
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ 
To join: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?WikiHomePage#nid1J    (01)

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>