There are instances where nature penalizes the rational. For instance, revenge is irrational, but being thought of as someone who would take revenge gives advantages.
I would generally avoid calling a behavior irrational without providing specific context. Revenge is no more irrational than a peacock’s tail. They are both costly signals that can result in a significant boost to your reputation in the right social context...if you are good enough to pull them off.
Well, always revenge is more rational than always forgive, anyway. I would expect most people here to know about Axelrod’s tit-for-tat, so maybe Phil means something else by revenge than the obvious.
Not all revenge takes place in prisoner dilemmas. I think somebody, preferably somebody more informed than me, should write LW posts on the dynamics of repeated Chicken (there was some literature out there on this last time I looked).
I would generally avoid calling a behavior irrational without providing specific context. Revenge is no more irrational than a peacock’s tail. They are both costly signals that can result in a significant boost to your reputation in the right social context...if you are good enough to pull them off.
Well, always revenge is more rational than always forgive, anyway. I would expect most people here to know about Axelrod’s tit-for-tat, so maybe Phil means something else by revenge than the obvious.
Not all revenge takes place in prisoner dilemmas. I think somebody, preferably somebody more informed than me, should write LW posts on the dynamics of repeated Chicken (there was some literature out there on this last time I looked).