And then they judge what some high-status members of their group would say about the particular Quantum Mechanics conundrum. Then, they side with him about that.
Almost nobody actually ponders what the Hell is really going on with the Schrodinger’s poor cat. Almost nobody.
I find it harder to reason about the question “what would high status people in group X say about Schrodinger’s cat?” than about the question “based on what I understand about QM, what would happen to Schrodinger’s cat?”. I admit that I suck at modelling other people, but how many people are actually good at it?
Not to say that belief signalling doesn’t happen. After all in many cases you just know what the high status people say since they, well, said it.
I admit that I suck at modeling other people, but how many people are actually good at it?
Many, many times more people are good at judging other people than at pondering QM (or any other) conundrums. Even if they are not especially good psychologists, they suck in QM even more.
I find it harder to reason about the question “what would high status people in group X say about Schrodinger’s cat?” than about the question “based on what I understand about QM, what would happen to Schrodinger’s cat?”. I admit that I suck at modelling other people, but how many people are actually good at it?
Not to say that belief signalling doesn’t happen. After all in many cases you just know what the high status people say since they, well, said it.
Many, many times more people are good at judging other people than at pondering QM (or any other) conundrums. Even if they are not especially good psychologists, they suck in QM even more.