X-Message-Number: 26509
References: <>
From: David Stodolsky <>

Subject: Re: More important battle; crowd-following equilibrium (was Re: [CN] 
reply)
Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2005 21:08:47 +0200

On Jul 3, 2005, at 4:03 PM, Tim Freeman wrote:

While I agree with the conclusion of the post as a whole, the analysis 
has some specific errors. However, more important then the specific 
errors is the way the analysis is structured.

> Doing what I can
> to try to keep myself alive is (in my opinion) more important than
> trying to change the outcome for the crowd, mostly because I'm much
> more likely to control my own actions than I am to successfully
> influence a crowd.

Here we are given a choice between changing the behavior of the 
individual or the group. However, individual behavior change always 
occurs with reference to a group, if not in a group context. Thus, 
consideration of both the individual and the group will almost always 
lead to better solutions. This is a general problem of economic 
analysis, which has only begun to be remedied in recent years by 
experimental studies within the field. We can say that the more 
economists act like social psychologists, the more valid are their 
results ;-).

Certainly with cryonics, the structure of the group (institutional 
arrangements) are crucial, since individuals are expected to be 
completely dependent on the group for extended periods


dss


David S. Stodolsky    SpamTo: 

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=26509