Internet Promotes Self-Delusion Via Non-Statistical Validation

I have a hypothesis regarding some of the impetus behind Trump and related hate rhetoric of recent years. It's the internet.

Ok, it's more than the mere existence of the internet. It's an originally unforeseen emergent property of the internet: No matter how wrong or bad the behaviors you exhibit or promote are, it's easy to find a population of people who'll support it. That's the "beauty" of an online network that transcends walls, streets, cities, and states. It's a strength of the internet that you can find those like you, with your same interests.

But that isn't where I'm going, because that's obvious. My hypothesis is that the internet is a great tool for self-delusion. Because here's the thing. You'll find tens, hundreds, or in the case of Trump, thousands of people willing to validate every "Sad," "really terrible," and racist implication you utter. But consider.

Human brains aren't great at statistics. Prime example: sharks kill about 10 people a year, if that, worldwide. Accidentally falling on the stairs kills more than x10 that a year in the US alone. Stairs clearly need far more attention than sharks.

Which leads me back to the internet's role of self-delusion via non-statistical validation: It only takes a relatively small number of likes/loves/+1s/upvotes to make you think that the potentially sketchy thing you just said or posted was actually genius. Consider for a moment that internet validation might not be your best measure of what is actually moral, ethical, and reasonable.

D&D Alignment

Now that 4th Edition D&D is released, excerpts from the rules are a little less exciting, eh?

But, an excerpt that released last week discussed D&D alignment, and some of our thoughts about why alignment was updated. Behind the scenes, I was the chair of the alignment committee, and the report I and my committee put together greatly influenced the final alignment system. Here is a summary of what we were thinking, in simplified form.

Like everything else for 4th Edition of D&D, we thought long and hard about the alignment system we wanted to launch with the new edition. The struggle of good heroes against evil villains is one D&D’s core tenants. The D&D alignment system possesses a heritage and brand identity we did not want to lose. If we could overcome a couple of issues associated with the traditional alignment system without introducing new problems, we knew that we absolutely had to preserve the system so players could still talk about their lawful good paladin or the chaotic evil demon they vanquished.

As we saw it, several issues plagued D&D alignment, including:

1. A character’s alignment, chosen at character creation, can become a straight-jacket on that character’s actions. Consider the paladin we’ve all seen in play, “I had to attack the rogue, I’m lawful good,” or the rogue, “I’m chaotic good! That means sometimes I push you off the bridge; come on, don’t get mad!” or some similar sentiment when presented with a role-playing choice. For this reason, many characters stuck with neutral: a nebulous self-serving alignment (as was then defined), a “me first” mentality that didn’t necessarily promote party cohesion either.


2. In 3rd Edition, choosing an alignment usually had the unfortunate mechanical repercussion of making the aligned player vulnerable to an opposing aligned attack of a foe. It’s not really ideal that being good made you more vulnerable to demonic attacks, for instance. Another reason some players stuck with the neutral alignment of previous editions.


3. The alignment system was tied to game cosmology, in ways that sometimes translated to physical effects that didn’t lead to fun gameplay.

So we came up with a new alignment system for 4th Edition, though one not completely unlike the previous version. It saves most of the old terms, if not their cosmological or gameplay significance. If any statement can sum up the new system, it is: “Alignment means making an effort.” --Michele Carter.

Thus was born the concept of unaligned. More importantly, the concept that unaligned is benign. Being unaligned is not the neutral alignment of previous editions. Someone who is unaligned is assumed to be an “easy-going” and sometimes even helpful person, especially when it’s easy to be helpful. Just like in real life, where it’s arguable that many people (cocooned in their routines and safe lives provided by a supporting civilization) are unaligned, your fantasy character can enjoy the same freedom from thinking too hard about morality but still be granted the benefit of doubt when they are judged.

Of course, many players will feel benign isn’t good enough, and so declare themselves good or lawful good. These characters are willing to put themselves in harm’s way to uphold a virtue or save an innocent’s life, even if there is the very real possibility they could lose their own life in the process. Such willingness for self-sacrifice is not benign; it is good.

Laughing Rats and its Consequence

I heard a story on NPR (probably the Radiolab program) about a guy doing research on rats.

Apparently, rats vocalize at too high a pitch for humans to hear, but special microphone equipment in a rat cage dials down the pitch enough to allow us to hear the occasional little chirps rats make at this frequency. After ten years of study that went nowhere, the idea came to the researcher to tickle a rat. Suddenly, the chirps came hard and fast and sounded oddly like . . . laughter.

Another rat, same thing. It turns out rats like to be tickled, and they laugh in a way that is eerily like a human baby being tickled. Check out this video:

Anyway, the thought immediately occurred to me that if rats can feel this very simple human joy, it's probably true that most mammals can. Even the ones we regularly slaughter and eat.

Which leads me inexorably to my next thought: I don't think I can morally justify personally eating higher order animals.

So I'm back to being a vegetarian. I'm afraid birds are out too--but I'll still eat eggs, milk (and cheese), and fish. This'll be the third time in my life I've tried to be a vegetarian. Maybe third time'll be the charm? My omnivore genes may power through my moral decision in the end, but I'm ready to give this another go.