Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that If the proportion of Fairmen falls below 33%, Fairmen tend toward extinction.

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Evolutionary game models assume population-level averaging, but real agents cluster spatially, enabling Fairmen to form local majorities below 33% global frequency.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Nowak and May (1992) demonstrated that spatial structure sustains cooperative strategies at frequencies that well-mixed models predict extinction, undermining the 33% threshold's generality.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.The 33% threshold assumes fixed strategy distributions, but Skyrms (1996) shows that deliberational dynamics allow agents to update strategies faster than selection eliminates them.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If Fairmen can conditionally adjust behavior upon detecting Greedy opponents, the fitness calculus changes before population proportions reach the extinction threshold.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Below 33%, Fairmen do not encounter each other often enough to achieve compensating payoffs.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Losses to Greedies are not offset by gains from Fairman-Fairman encounters at low Fairman frequency.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.