DOCSLIB.ORG

Motivation Matters: a Critical Analysis and Refutation of Evolutionary Arguments for Psychological Altruism

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Motivation Matters: a Critical Analysis and Refutation of Evolutionary Arguments for Psychological Altruism MOTIVATION MATTERS: A CRITICAL ANALYSIS AND REFUTATION OF EVOLUTIONARY ARGUMENTS FOR PSYCHOLOGICAL ALTRUISM Fred Curry A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate College of Bowling Green State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY May 2007 Committee: Michael Bradie, Advisor Thomas Wymer Graduate Faculty Representative David Sobel Sarah Worley © 2007 Fredrick Curry All Rights Reserved iii ABSTRACT Dr. Michael Bradie, Advisor The origin of altruistic behavior has long been a puzzle for evolutionary biologists, beginning with Darwin. Although group selection was first favored to explain cooperative and altruistic behaviors, the forces of individual selection came to be seen as far more prevalent, powerful, and responsive to change. The theory of group selection was replaced by other explanations for altruistic behavior such as kin selection (inclusive fitness theory) and game theory. Recently, however, group selection has been regaining credibility in evolutionary biology. This resurgence is largely due to the work of two of the most prominent proponents of group selection David Sloan Wilson, a biologist, and Eliot Sober, a philosopher of science, who believe evolutionary arguments not only explain the origin of altruistic behaviors but also help resolve the psychological egoism versus altruism debate by providing evidence that natural selection favors altruistic motivations (psychological altruism). While there is no necessary link between the existence of group selection and altruistic motivation, if Sober and Wilson are right that group selection pressures are nearly ubiquitous for social organisms, this additional selection pressure would mean that cooperative strategies, including true altruism, would be beneficial more often than under a scenario that only includes selection at the individual level. Their argument rests on two evolutionary principles: the direct/indirect asymmetry principle, which posits a mechanism that triggers a fitness-enhancing response by directly detecting a fitness-relevant situation, and the two are better than one argument, which posits that an organism that has multiple mechanisms that serve the same function has a fitness advantage over an organism that has only one of these mechanisms. iv While both of these principles are valid, the evolutionary arguments that incorporate them are flawed and the evolutionary arguments arising from them should instead lead to the conclusion that psychological altruism is improbable. Psychological hedonism is a more likely trigger for the most fitness-enhancing degree of behavioral altruism had the chance to become firmly entrenched before psychological altruism could have ever even made an appearance. v To my late mother who would have been proud. vi ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to give a special thanks to the following people: Dr. Michael Bradie, Dr. David Sobel, and Dr. Sara Worley who were always willing to share their valuable time and opinions with me. I am especially grateful to Dr. Bradie who petitioned the school for extra funding when my eye disease set my work back a year. My father Fred Curry senior, my brother Daniel Curry, and my grandmother Alberta Curry also very much deserve my gratitude for their emotional and, on occasion, financial support. I would also like to thank Jill Olthouse, who was a bottomless fount of emotional support and encouragement when times got tough. Finally I would be remiss if I didn‘t also thank that fine drug caffeine and all the late night pizza delivery persons of Bowling Green Ohio. vii TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................................ ii LIST OF FIGURES ..................................................................................................................... xiii MOTIVATION MATTERS: A CRITICAL ANALYSIS AND REFUTATION OF EVOLUTIONARY ARGUMENTS FOR PSYCHOLOGICAL ALTRUISM................... 1 Overview ..................................................................................................................................... 1 CHAPTER I: THE PSYCHOLOGICAL EGOISM VS. ALTRUISM DEBATE AND HISTORICAL ATTEMPTS TO RESOLVE IT ................................................................. 4 1_1 The Philosophical Arguments Concerning Psychological Egoism/Altruism ...................... 7 1_1.1 The Butler‘s Stone Argument against Hedonism ............................................................. 8 1_1.2 The Paradox of Hedonism .......................................................................................... 18 1_1.3 Nozick‘s Experience Machine .................................................................................... 21 1_1.3.1 The real reason why the experience machine argument fails. ............................. 29 1_2 The State of the Egoism/Altruism Debate in Light of Empirical Psychological Studies .................................................................................. 35 1_2.1 Problems Concerning Introspection ............................................................................ 36 1_2.2 Why the Law of Effect Fails as a Solution ................................................................. 38 1_2.3 Batson‘s Experiments ................................................................................................. 42 1_2.3.1 The Aversive-Arousal Reduction Hypothesis ..................................................... 44 1_2.3.2 The Empathy Specific Punishment Hypothesis ................................................... 48 1_2.3.3 The Empathy Specific Reward Hypothesis ......................................................... 50 1_2.3.4 ESR2: The Negative-State Relief Hypothesis ..................................................... 53 1_2.3.4 Batson Tests the Negative-State Relief Hypothesis (ESR2) ................................ 57 viii 1_2.3. 5 Batson and the Empathetic Joy Hypothesis ........................................................ 61 1_2.3.6 Some Conclusions Regarding Batson‘s Work ..................................................... 68 1_3 Summary ............................................................................................................................ 72 CHAPTER II: EVOLUTIONARY ALTRUISM AND GROUP SELECTION: HOW NATURAL SELECTION CAN FAVOR INDIVIDUAL SACRIFICE ................ 75 2_1 Two Different Concepts of Fitness .................................................................................... 81 2_2 Sober and Wilson‘s Definition of Evolutionary Altruism ................................................. 84 2_3 Group Selection and the Haystack Model ......................................................................... 87 2_4 Why Have Modern Biologists Been so Unreceptive to Group Selection? ........................ 94 2_5 Trait Groups and the Haystack Model without Haystacks ................................................ 99 2_5.1 More Ways in Which Trait Groups Improve the Case for Group Selection ........................................................................................ 108 2_6 Real World Examples of Group Level Selection: ........................................................... 109 2_6.2 Artificial Group Selection for Egg Production ......................................................... 110 2_6.2 Examples of Group Selection Outside of the Lab..................................................... 111 2_7 How Have Biologists Explained Away Apparently Obvious Instances of Altruism and Cooperation in the Natural World? ....................................................... 115 2_7.1 Kin Selection ............................................................................................................. 115 2_7.2 Evolutionary Game Theory and Reciprocal Altruism .............................................. 119 2_8 Applying Sober and Wilson‘s Multi Level Selection Theory to Real Populations ......................................................................................................... 129 2_9 Summary .......................................................................................................................... 134 CHAPTER III: ADAPTATIONS THAT ENHANCE GROUP SELECTION .......................... 136 ix 3_1 Assortative Behavior ........................................................................................................ 137 3_1.1 Wilson and Dugatkin‘s Simulations and the Power of Assortative Behavior ............................................................................... 143 3_1.1.1 The problem of origination. ............................................................................... 147 3_1.1.2 What do guppies have to do with human beings?.............................................. 150 3_1.2 Recap ......................................................................................................................... 153 3_2 Carrots, Sticks, and Altruism ........................................................................................... 154 3_2.1 Another Look at the Guppies .................................................................................... 158 3_2.2 How Punishment Amplifies Altruism ....................................................................... 160 3_2.2.1 Does Punishment Reduce Instances of True Altruism? ..................................... 163 3_2.3 Another Kind of Freeloader .....................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Excesss Karaoke Master by Artist
    XS Master by ARTIST Artist Song Title Artist Song Title (hed) Planet Earth Bartender TOOTIMETOOTIMETOOTIM ? & The Mysterians 96 Tears E 10 Years Beautiful UGH! Wasteland 1999 Man United Squad Lift It High (All About 10,000 Maniacs Candy Everybody Wants Belief) More Than This 2 Chainz Bigger Than You (feat. Drake & Quavo) [clean] Trouble Me I'm Different 100 Proof Aged In Soul Somebody's Been Sleeping I'm Different (explicit) 10cc Donna 2 Chainz & Chris Brown Countdown Dreadlock Holiday 2 Chainz & Kendrick Fuckin' Problems I'm Mandy Fly Me Lamar I'm Not In Love 2 Chainz & Pharrell Feds Watching (explicit) Rubber Bullets 2 Chainz feat Drake No Lie (explicit) Things We Do For Love, 2 Chainz feat Kanye West Birthday Song (explicit) The 2 Evisa Oh La La La Wall Street Shuffle 2 Live Crew Do Wah Diddy Diddy 112 Dance With Me Me So Horny It's Over Now We Want Some Pussy Peaches & Cream 2 Pac California Love U Already Know Changes 112 feat Mase Puff Daddy Only You & Notorious B.I.G. Dear Mama 12 Gauge Dunkie Butt I Get Around 12 Stones We Are One Thugz Mansion 1910 Fruitgum Co. Simon Says Until The End Of Time 1975, The Chocolate 2 Pistols & Ray J You Know Me City, The 2 Pistols & T-Pain & Tay She Got It Dizm Girls (clean) 2 Unlimited No Limits If You're Too Shy (Let Me Know) 20 Fingers Short Dick Man If You're Too Shy (Let Me 21 Savage & Offset &Metro Ghostface Killers Know) Boomin & Travis Scott It's Not Living (If It's Not 21st Century Girls 21st Century Girls With You 2am Club Too Fucked Up To Call It's Not Living (If It's Not 2AM Club Not
    [Show full text]
  • Benevolence, Utility, and Self-Love in Hobbes and Hume Jenna Kreyche
    Stance | Volume 4 | 2011 How We Are Moral: Benevolence, Utility, and Self-Love in Hobbes and Hume Jenna Kreyche ABSTRACT: In this paper, I reconstruct Hobbes’ theory of self-love. I then examine Hume’s arguments that (i) self-love does not properly account for moral behavior and (ii) self-love is unnecessary for moral theory. I ar- gue that Hobbesian self-love can account for both of Hume’s objections. Further, I use an analysis of Hobbes’ Deliberation to show, contra Hume, that self-love does not entail a lack of intention in moral action. A Brief Overview Of Hume’s Moral Philosophy David Hume grounds his moral theory in the benevolent nature of humans, which he supports with an argument against the theory of self-love. Self- love, which can also be referred to as psychological egoism,1 “accounts for every moral sentiment by the principle of self-love,” or the ultimate concern with one’s own happiness and preservation.2 His moral theory is based on utility, which means that all social virtues are defined by their usefulness 1. Hume uses the term “self-love” in writing, but for the purposes of this paper I will use the syn- onymic term “psychological egoism” interchangeably with self-love. 2. David Hume, An Enquiry Concerning the Principles of Morals, Ed. Tom L. Beauchamp, (New York: Oxford University Press, 1998): 109. 27 How We Are Moral to the individual or the society. Hume posited that morality is determined by man’s naturally occurring sentiments rather than reason because pleas- ant sentiments indicate traits that are useful, such as prudence, courage, kindness, and honesty.3 These virtues inspire “our approbation and good- will” because they “contribute to the happiness of society.”4 However, our approval of these virtues, and in turn our concern with the welfare of soci- ety, is motivated by benevolence because the “principles of humanity and sympathy enter so deeply into all our sentiments.”5 In other words, man values and praises what is beneficial to him and his fellow men because of his love for humanity.
    [Show full text]
  • CONFERENCE AT-A-GLANCE THURSDAY, APRIL 12 3:00 P.M
    Conference Schedule CONFERENCE AT-A-GLANCE THURSDAY, APRIL 12 3:00 p.m. - 9:00 p.m. Registration Narragansett Pre-Function 6:00 p.m. - 10:00 p.m. The NRHC Game Night Providence Ballroom 8:00 p.m. - 10:00 p.m. Big Picture Discussion Bristol/Kent FRIDAY, APRIL 13 7:30 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. Registration Narragansett Pre-Function 9:00 a.m. - 9:45 a.m. City as Text Intro and Speaker Narragansett Ballroom 10:00 a.m. - 3:15 p.m. City as Text Providence 3:30 p.m. - 4:45 p.m. City as Text Reflection Narragansett Ballroom 5:00 p.m. - 7:15 p.m. Graduate and Transfer Fair Waterplace Ballroom 6:00 p.m. - 7:15 p.m. Student Art Show Waterplace Ballroom 7:30 p.m. - 9:30 p.m. Banquet Narragansett Ballroom 9:30 p.m. - midnight Open Mic Night Narragansett Ballroom SATURDAY, APRIL 14 7:30 a.m. - 9:00 a.m. Continental Breakfast Narragansett Ballroom 7:30 a.m. - 9:00 a.m. Poster Session I Narragansett Ballroom 7:45 a.m. - 12:00 p.m. Registration Narragansett Pre-Function 9:05 a.m. - 10:20 a.m. Session I Papers and Roundtables Breakout Rooms 10:35 a.m. - 11:50 a.m. Session II Papers and Roundtables Breakout Rooms 12:00 p.m. - 1:30 p.m. Presidential Lunch and Address Narragansett Ballroom 1:40 p.m. - 2:55 p.m. Session III Papers and Roundtables Breakout Rooms 3:10 p.m. - 4:25 p.m.
    [Show full text]
  • Selfish Genes and Social Darwinism
    Selfish Genes and Social Darwinism MARY MIDGLEY Exchanging views in Philosophy with a two-year time-lag is getting rather like conversation with the Andromeda Nebula. I am distressed that my reply to Messrs Mackie and Dawkins, explaining what made me write so crossly about The Selfish Gene, has been so long delayed.1 Mr Mackie's sudden death in December i98i adds a further dimension to this distress. Apology is due, not only for the delay but for the impatient tone of my article. One should not lose one's temper, and doing so always makes for confused argument. My basic objections remain. But I certainly ought to have expressed them more clearly and temperately. This reply must, I think, concentrate simply on explaining the background of reasons why these objections matter. I shall have very little to say directly about Mackie's argument, since it was chiefly just a very fair and sympathetic exposition of Dawkin's views. Mackie himself drew only very modest conclusions from them, and avoided the excesses of psychological egoism, as of course he also does in his own book. But this still leaves two serious worries. In the first place I do not think that The Selfish Gene itself, on any natural interpretation, does avoid those excesses. In the second, even when modestly interpreted, I think it is far too one-sided a book to be picked out and used in isolation for the re-education of moral philosophy in the biological facts of life. My own central philosophic concern-which I think Dawkins shares- is to make possible a more realistic attitude about the place of Homo sapiens in the world.
    [Show full text]
  • Egoism and Altruism: the “Antagonists” Or the “Brothers”?
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by InfinityPress Journal of Studies in Social Sciences ISSN 2201-4624 Volume 7, Number 2, 2014, 164-188 Egoism and Altruism: the “Antagonists” or the “Brothers”? Levit L. Z., Ph. D. The Centre for Psychological Health and Education, Minsk, Belarus Abstract. The article under consideration deals with the theoretical analysis and the practical research of the ratio between the two notions: egoism and altruism. The author shows the inadequacy of the one-sided, morally loaded interpretations of both terms. The scores of two ESM-investigations mostly show the positive correlation between the “egoism” and the “altruism” scales in a person’s everyday activity. The results obtained give the opportunity to replace the inadequate view on egoism and altruism as opposites by a more appropriate metaphor of the older and the younger brother. Such an approach removes the idea of antagonism which is usually ascribed to the egoism-altruism interrelation. Key words: egoism, altruism, meaning, happiness, personal uniqueness, positive psychology. © Copyright 2014 the authors. 164 Journal of Studies in Social Sciences 165 Person-oriented conception of happiness: introduction and the brief explanation. In the years 2006 – 2012 the author (Leonid Levit) elaborated a synthesizing conception of self-realization and happiness, which is based on the ideas of the systemic approach and combines biological, psychological, social and spiritual (the highest) levels of individual life and activity. The results of our seven-year work on the problem are summarized in five monographs (Levit, 2010; 2011a; 2011c; 2012 a; 2013 c) and articles (Levit, 2009; 2011 b, 2012 b, 2012 c; 2013 a; 2013 b; 2013 e; Levit, Radchikova, 2012 a).
    [Show full text]
  • Ethical Theory and Sexual Ethics
    Ethical Theory and Sexual Ethics Ideas about ethics, and what counts as an ethical choice, have seen rapid change. This set of notes will suggest that there is a movement towards an evolutionary understanding of morality and outline what that emergent framework is beginning to look like for human sexual relationships. Western culture carries the last vestiges of a religious framework but increasingly there is broad acceptance of the view that Laws and morality are a human construct. Utilitarian frameworks are well established and provide a secular mechanism for moral decision-making. Utilitarianism Utilitarian frameworks all argue that morality is a rational activity and can be calculated. All maintain that the morally right course of action is that which leads to the greatest good for the greatest number. For Bentham, like Epicurus, the good is defined by actions that maximize the quantity of pleasure and minimize the quantity of pain. While Mill and Singer make minor adjustments to this they agree that morality depends on the accurate prediction of consequences, and that the end justifies the means. Morality can be, and should be, calculated and all people involved count equally for the purpose of the calculation. Bentham and Mill recommend that we pursue our natural inclinations towards pleasure (and against pain) and that this is where morality lies. In a number of ways the recommendations that flow from this ethical framework cohere with the values of the Christian civilisation from which it emerged. The desirability of ultimate and equal respect for persons is at the heart of the Gospel message.
    [Show full text]
  • Ascap Songwriters in the Top 50 of the Country Aircheck
    Peak Position Peak Wks. on 2020 Artist Title Label (wks. at No.1) Date Chart Rank JASON ALDEAN We Back Macon Music/Broken Bow 6 3/23/20 21 43 JASON ALDEAN Got What I Got Macon Music/Broken Bow 1(1) 10/19/20 29 33 A JIMMIE ALLEN Make Me Want To Stoney Creek 1(1) 3/2/20 18 28 s INGRID ANDRESS More Hearts Than Mine Warner/WEA 1(1) 4/27/20 26 24 of TOP 15 KELSEA BALLERINI Hole In The Bottle Black River 13 11/9/20 19 75 GABBY BARRETT I Hope Warner/WAR 1(1) 4/20/20 25 3 LEE BRICE One Of Them Girls Curb 1(2) 10/5/20 26 32 GARTH BROOKS & BLAKE SHELTON Dive Bar Pearl 5 3/2/20 17 56 B KANE BROWN Homesick RCA 1(2) 3/16/20 20 17 KANE BROWN Cool Again RCA 2 9/28/20 25 37 LUKE BRYAN What She Wants Tonight Capitol 1(1) 3/30/20 22 30 2020 LUKE BRYAN One Margarita Capitol 1(2) 7/13/20 15 22 theYEAR KENNY CHESNEY Tip Of My Tongue Blue Chair/Warner/WEA 7 11/18/19 8 74 CARLY PEARCE in MUSIC KENNY CHESNEY Here And Now Blue Chair/Warner/WEA 1(1) 6/29/20 21 36 CMA Musical Event of the Year (“I Hope You’re Happy Now”) KENNY CHESNEY Happy Does Blue Chair/Warner/WEA 11 11/9/20 16 64 ERIC CHURCH Monsters EMI Nashville 15 5/4/20 30 55 C LUKE COMBS Even Though I’m Leaving River House/Columbia 1(3) 12/2/19 9 5 LUKE COMBS f/ERIC CHURCH Does To Me River House/Columbia 1(2) 6/1/20 20 11 DAN + SHAY & JUSTIN BIEBER LUKE COMBS Lovin’ On You River House/Columbia 1(2) 9/21/20 16 38 JAMIE MOORE & CRAIG WISEMAN 3x AMA Winners LUKE COMBS Better Together River House/Columbia 15 11/9/20 5 -- Aircheck #1 Country Song of the Year Favorite Song/Collab of the Year (“10,000 Hours”)
    [Show full text]
  • In Defense of Happiness: a Response to the Experience Machine
    In Defense of Happiness: A Response to the Experience Machine Introduction Hedonism has seen better days. As a philosophical doctrine, it flourished in the utilitarian climate maintained by the great nineteenth-century British empiricists Jeremy Bentham, John Stuart Mill, and Henry Sidgwick. And even though utilitarianism continues to hold sway among many contempo­ rary ethical theorists, its hedonistic foundations have been all but abandoned. Nowadays, most philosophers entertain the idea of hedonism just long enough to dismiss it. Traditionally, hedonism has come in many guises. The term itself is derived from the Greek word hoovi] (hedone), meaning pleasure, and theo­ ries are hedonistic in virtue of the central role they assign to the notion of pleasure. Psychological hedonism is a view about human motivation. It holds that pleasure is the only possible object of a desire or pursuit. Moral hedon­ ism contends that pleasure is the only thing one ought to desire or pursue. A third version, rational hedonism, maintains that pleasure is the only thing one has reason to desire and pursue. 1 The most familiar formulation of hedonism, though, and the one with which I am primarily concerned here, is a doctrine about well-being and prudential value. Well-being is itself an elusive concept in need of explanation. An ex­ haustive and reductive definition is, however, beyond the scope of this essay; I offer instead some synonymous expressions. Although these expressions may not dispel all confusion, they will, I hope, help us recognize what is ascribed to a person when we say that he or she has well-being.
    [Show full text]
  • The Methods of Ethics
    The Methods of Ethics Henry Sidgwick Copyright © Jonathan Bennett 2017. All rights reserved [Brackets] enclose editorial explanations. Small ·dots· enclose material that has been added, but can be read as though it were part of the original text. Occasional •bullets, and also indenting of passages that are not quotations, are meant as aids to grasping the structure of a sentence or a thought. Every four-point ellipsis . indicates the omission of a brief passage that seems to present more difficulty than it is worth. Longer omissions are reported between brackets in normal-sized type.—The division of the work into Books, chapters, and numbered sections is Sidgwick’s. —Cross-references follow this system: ‘chapter 3’ means ‘chapter 3 of this Book’. ‘chapter 4.2’ means ‘chapter 4, section 2, of this Book’. ‘II/3’ means ‘Book II, chapter 3’. ‘IV/3.4’ means ‘Book IV, chapter 3, section 4’. An accompanying page-number refers to the page where the passage in question starts.—This version omits most of the 2,000+ cautions that Sidgwick includes, such as ‘I think. ’, ‘I conceive. ’, ‘it seems. ’ and so on. Even with these out of the way, the work doesn’t come across as bullyingly dogmatic.—In this version, most notably on pages 166 and 196, the author addresses the reader (‘you’), but in the original it is always ‘the reader’ and ‘he’.—This version is based on the sixth edition of the work (1901), the last non-posthumous one. The first edition appeared in 1874, the year after Mill died. First launched: October 2011 The Methods of Ethics Henry Sidgwick Contents BOOK I 1 Chapter 1: Introduction........................................................1 Chapter 2: The relation of ethics to politics.............................................7 Chapter 3: Ethical judgments...................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 6. Railton's “Alienation, Consequentialism, and the Demands of Morality”
    6. Railton’s “Alienation, Consequentialism, and the Demands of Morality” Martín Abreu Zavaleta July 14, 2015 Railton is addressing one kind of problem that we raised. In class, we discussed the case of a parent who is offered a choice between saving the life of her own child or saving the life of another child. Saving the life of the other child would produce overall more utility than saving the life of her own, so utilitarian consequentialism claims that she should save the life of the other child. To many people, this seems to be the wrong result: surely, they think, whatever duty she has to save the life of the other child is overridden by her duties and obligations to save the life of her own child. Samuel Scheffler presents us with a less tragic, but related problem for consequentialism. Schef- fler observes that consequentialism demands that we don’t buy new shoes if we can spend that money in ways that will help other people more, or that we don’t watch TV if instead we could be doing more utility maximizing things. These two cases point to one important problem for consequentialism (here, under the guise of utilitarianism). Consequentialism seems to alienate us from the people we love and from things that make our lives richer. By focusing solely on the maximization of utility, it seems to ignore the value that other things bring into our lives: things like friendship, the love for one’s family, entertainment, art appreciation, etc. A life lived in line with consequentialist demands seems to be a very impoverished life, enslaved to the maximization of utility.
    [Show full text]
  • Paradoxes Situations That Seems to Defy Intuition
    Paradoxes Situations that seems to defy intuition PDF generated using the open source mwlib toolkit. See http://code.pediapress.com/ for more information. PDF generated at: Tue, 08 Jul 2014 07:26:17 UTC Contents Articles Introduction 1 Paradox 1 List of paradoxes 4 Paradoxical laughter 16 Decision theory 17 Abilene paradox 17 Chainstore paradox 19 Exchange paradox 22 Kavka's toxin puzzle 34 Necktie paradox 36 Economy 38 Allais paradox 38 Arrow's impossibility theorem 41 Bertrand paradox 52 Demographic-economic paradox 53 Dollar auction 56 Downs–Thomson paradox 57 Easterlin paradox 58 Ellsberg paradox 59 Green paradox 62 Icarus paradox 65 Jevons paradox 65 Leontief paradox 70 Lucas paradox 71 Metzler paradox 72 Paradox of thrift 73 Paradox of value 77 Productivity paradox 80 St. Petersburg paradox 85 Logic 92 All horses are the same color 92 Barbershop paradox 93 Carroll's paradox 96 Crocodile Dilemma 97 Drinker paradox 98 Infinite regress 101 Lottery paradox 102 Paradoxes of material implication 104 Raven paradox 107 Unexpected hanging paradox 119 What the Tortoise Said to Achilles 123 Mathematics 127 Accuracy paradox 127 Apportionment paradox 129 Banach–Tarski paradox 131 Berkson's paradox 139 Bertrand's box paradox 141 Bertrand paradox 146 Birthday problem 149 Borel–Kolmogorov paradox 163 Boy or Girl paradox 166 Burali-Forti paradox 172 Cantor's paradox 173 Coastline paradox 174 Cramer's paradox 178 Elevator paradox 179 False positive paradox 181 Gabriel's Horn 184 Galileo's paradox 187 Gambler's fallacy 188 Gödel's incompleteness theorems
    [Show full text]
  • Country Update
    Country Update BILLBOARD.COM/NEWSLETTERS NOVEMBER 9, 2020 | PAGE 1 OF 17 INSIDE BILLBOARD COUNTRY UPDATE [email protected] Russell Dickerson ASCAP, BMI, SESAC Country Extends Streak >page 4 Winners Reflect On Their Jobs’ Value CMA Battles COVID-19 Successful country songwriters know how to embed their songs song of the year victor for co-writing the Luke Combs hit “Even >page 9 with just the right amount of repetition. Though I’m Leaving.” Old Dominion’s “One Man Band” took The performing rights organizations set the top of their 2020 the ASCAP country song trophy for three of the group’s mem- winners’ lists to repeat as the ASCAP, BMI and SESAC country bers — Trevor Rosen, Brad Tursi and Matthew Ramsey, who songwriter and publisher of the year awards all went to enti- previously earned the ASCAP songwriter-artist trophy in 2017 Christmas With ties who have pre- — plus songwriter The Oaks, LeVox, viously taken top Josh Osborne, Dan + Shay honors. A shley who adds the title >page 10 Gorley (“Catch,” to two song of the “Living”) hooked year winners he ASCAP’s song- co-wrote with Sam writer medallion Hunt: 2018 cham- Trebek Leaves Some for the eighth time, pion “Body Like a Trivia In His Wake and for the sev- Back Road” and >page 10 enth year in a row, 2015 victor “Leave when victors were the Night On.” unveiled Nov. 9. Even Ben Bur- Makin’ Tracks: Ross Copperman gess, who won Michael Ray’s (“What She Wants his first-ever BMI Tonight,” “Love award with “Whis- ‘Whiskey And Rain’ COPPERMAN GORLEY McGINN >page 14 Someone”) swiped key Glasses,” BMI’s songwriter cruised to the PRO’s title for the fourth time on Nov.
    [Show full text]