Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Wisdom of Crowds final exam (How might an individual come to have…
Wisdom of Crowds final exam
How might an individual come to have polarized beliefs? How is this different from how a group might be polarized?
Individual: Temporal Order
The database has equal amounts A & B
Depending on the order you take in A & B, you'll be supporting A or B even though you read both evidence
Dogmatists will identify any evidence that contradicts theirs as misleading
One way of getting there might be Temporal order
Group: Information Cascade
There needs to be diversity of opinion and independence for a group to be wise
People need to have their own opinions and their own private information
Opinion on whats true
If people see a group of people doing something, then it must be right
Information on what's true
the more people go towards one solution, the more "true" it seems
Eventually, since everyone's there, people just believe it's true
Becomes rational to stop relying on your own private information and just follow the group
Difference
Individual: all they rely on is their private information
Group: people stop looking at their private information
What role might causality play in the justification of an individual’s belief? How might it affect group belief?
Individual:
In order for a person to have knowlege, they follow JTB
Justification
Its metaphysically true
Its a belief
Causation found in justification
Car in parking lot
Group: Deflationary
Justification done through aggregation
No causality needed for justification
everyone picks the wrong day to rain, but they know its going to rain that week
3.When is someone else’s belief that, e.g., the library is closed on Sunday, a reason to believe the same thing? Why and when should I defer to others?
Defer completely if an Expert
More information and better judgement
Defer somewhat if a guru
Less information but better judgement
What would jesus do
do I need equal view?
How might the organization of a group make it especially vulnerable to false beliefs? It is inevitable that some groups will become closed-minded and enthusiastic for conspiracies?
Centralized Groups
Centralized
Quick
Prone to corruption
Decentralized
Slow
Inventively will get the right answer
Size
Smaller Groups
Inevitable they'll be polarized
Need independence to be a wise crowd
Since small, independence is not possible
Even if everyone hates each other
Less alternative hypothesis space
individual: less likely to be polarized in the short term
Group: repeated interaction will cause people to fall into information cascades once independence is gone
How can being more informed become a threat to your autonomy? Consider 2 views.
Space of hypothesis view
Too much hypotheses you're just going to stick with your guns
Only receptive to certain narratives
Alternative hypotheses justification
You can twist Information, even from another side, to support your own claim
Even if completely against your own views
9/11 conspiracy
A missile hit the pentagon
but there were plane parts
The plane parts were strewn around by the CIA
Cigarette example
Companies pushed the idea that it may or may not be cigarettes as well as just simply not cigarettes
Added other hypotheses in the mix, including their original cigs dont cause cancer
People remain polarized
Fricker
Being exposed to more information in a space where epistemic injustices might happen will lead to marginlized people's to internalize racist sterotypes
They might depend to doubt themselves and the experiences of their group
Their autonomy is harmed, they only trust the epistemic agents that are harming them