What do you think of https://substack.com/profile/19303065-o-h-murphy/note/c-54485281?r=bhqc9 ? Would you think that (I don't actually believe this but just... throwing it out there in ) right wing people are more likely to think themselves as altruistic but less likely to be altruistic in the first place?
>They may choose any division they like, including taking all the money for themselves. Player Y simply has to take what they’re given. It is the best experimental test of altruism towards strangers I know of
How is that a good test? Its not at all clear if player Y has a special claim to the money beyond any other stranger. An EA would take all the money and donate it. This seems to measure sensitivity to Schelling points/being singled out/blameable at least as much as altruism.
>Previous research has found a relationship between rightwing political views and defecting in the prisoner’s dilemma. As stated, this was very strongly replicated in the sample- in fact I think more strongly replicated than in many other studies (at least some of which have found no relationship), and with a massive number of respondents, far too large to be a statistical fluke.
I think this is very dependant on the reference population of the person - how much do you feel that people around you are trustworthy/your tribe? Scotts readership has very few rightwingers (and they believe in cthulu), so those feel very isolated and defect a lot. Psychology students, similar but less so. Maybe if you find some super deep south population, the relationship reverses.
"Areligious leftwinger’s median giving is 0.48% of their income, and areligious rightwinger’s median giving is 0.28% of their income."
Honestly surprised and saddened that giving is this low among Scott Alexander's areligious readers, both left- and rightwing. Scott himself is quite pro-charity and (if I recall correctly) has pledged to give 10% of his income, so I really thought that giving among *his readers* would be higher, whatever the averages for the broader population might be.
What do you think of https://substack.com/profile/19303065-o-h-murphy/note/c-54485281?r=bhqc9 ? Would you think that (I don't actually believe this but just... throwing it out there in ) right wing people are more likely to think themselves as altruistic but less likely to be altruistic in the first place?
>They may choose any division they like, including taking all the money for themselves. Player Y simply has to take what they’re given. It is the best experimental test of altruism towards strangers I know of
How is that a good test? Its not at all clear if player Y has a special claim to the money beyond any other stranger. An EA would take all the money and donate it. This seems to measure sensitivity to Schelling points/being singled out/blameable at least as much as altruism.
>Previous research has found a relationship between rightwing political views and defecting in the prisoner’s dilemma. As stated, this was very strongly replicated in the sample- in fact I think more strongly replicated than in many other studies (at least some of which have found no relationship), and with a massive number of respondents, far too large to be a statistical fluke.
I think this is very dependant on the reference population of the person - how much do you feel that people around you are trustworthy/your tribe? Scotts readership has very few rightwingers (and they believe in cthulu), so those feel very isolated and defect a lot. Psychology students, similar but less so. Maybe if you find some super deep south population, the relationship reverses.
Christianity is decreasing in the Western world (US and Europe) but globally it is in fact on the rise.
"Areligious leftwinger’s median giving is 0.48% of their income, and areligious rightwinger’s median giving is 0.28% of their income."
Honestly surprised and saddened that giving is this low among Scott Alexander's areligious readers, both left- and rightwing. Scott himself is quite pro-charity and (if I recall correctly) has pledged to give 10% of his income, so I really thought that giving among *his readers* would be higher, whatever the averages for the broader population might be.