Power to the sheeple!

  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #6
So eneeeway, from the article:

"The classic view is that uninformed or uncommitted individuals may allow extreme views to proliferate. We found that might not be the case," said lead author Iain Couzin, a Princeton assistant professor of ecology and evolutionary biology. He and his co-authors found that even a small population of indifferent individuals act as a counterbalance to the minority — whose passion even can cause informed individuals in the majority to waver — and restore majority rule.

"We show that when the uninformed participate, the group can come to a majority decision even in the face of a powerful minority," Couzin said. "They prevent deadlock and fragmentation because the strength of an opinion no longer matters — it comes down to numbers. You can imagine this being a good or bad thing. Either way, a certain number of uninformed individuals keep that minority from dictating or complicating the behavior of the group."

Of course this effect has its limits, Couzin said. He and his co-authors also found that if the number of uninformed becomes too high, a group ceases to function coherently, with neither the majority nor the minority taking the lead. "Eventually, noise dominates because there just aren't enough informed individuals to guide the group," he said.
 
Um... it was a study on... fish.

A Princeton University-based research team reports Dec. 16 that this finding — based on group decision-making experiments on fish, as well as mathematical models and computer simulations — can ultimately provide insights into humans' political behavior.
 
Given the complexity and the shear numbers of clueless out there we have gone to the fail to function coherently side of the discussion.
 
Given the complexity and the shear numbers of clueless out there we have gone to the fail to function coherently side of the discussion.



Indeed ... that's one part of the topic which interests me.

I wonder if we are in the "fail to function coherently side".

I'm not sure we are. As I've noted elsewhere, I'm a fan of gridlock. I don't like some of the decisions which would be made if those who signed Grover Norquist's pledge had their way. Just as I don't like the things the Democrat-dominated congress would have done in the first two years of the Obama administration if the Republicans in the Senate hadn't been so effective at curbing much of it.

Maybe the current paralysis of Washington is the inertia of the majority working appropriately ... or relatively appropriately. Not pretty. But stopping swings to the extreme.
 
Um... it was a study on... fish.

A Princeton University-based research team reports Dec. 16 that this finding — based on group decision-making experiments on fish, as well as mathematical models and computer simulations — can ultimately provide insights into humans' political behavior.

Fish... Democrats... except that fish generally are more informed, there's little difference.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top