On hedonism and egoism

I once explained my "three-system maximization" theory to David Pierce - and then asked why he cared so much about maximizing happiness, and so little about maximizing genes and memes. He replied (I paraphrase) that it was only happiness that produced the subjective feeling that he actually cared about.

Here's Curt Welch expressing a similar sentiment:

Our society is highly ignorant, because our society is deeply infected with the memes of survival that blind people to their true purpose, which is to maximize human happiness, and not to maximize the odds of the survival of our memes, or our genes.

These are broadly similar sentiments to Dawkins:

We are built as gene machines and cultured as meme machines, but we have the power to turn against our creators. We, alone on earth, can rebel against the tyranny of the selfish replicators.

Stanovich expands on these ideas in his book The Robot's Rebellion.

According to the thesis that all values come from differential success at reproduction we are the product of three main maximizing systems, based on DNA genes, memes, and the reproducing agents inside brains associated with individual learning - which I will refer to as "pemes". Dawkins, Welch, Stanovich and Pearce are apparently on the side of the pemes - and are against the genes and memes.

Human motivations are the product of genes, memes, and pemes - which pull our motivation systems in multiple conflicting directions. I think we have to classify the idea that the "true purpose" of humans excludes two of these systems as scientific bunk. There's no "true purpose" of humans - just the various (and often conflicting) purposes associated with their genes, memes and pemes.

Similar to hedonism is egoism. There are some who value their minds so much that they are prepared to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars freeze their heads in order to preserve their essences. This seems as though it is an extreme form of a preference for pemes and memes - over DNA genes.

I think it is fair to say that different reproducers get the upper hand in different individuals. Some feel their sex drive or maternal instinct strongly - and act as DNA gene propagators. Others have religious conversions - and devote themselves to spreading their memes to others. Still others value their memories and personality so highly that they freeze their own heads. It's a diverse world, with many types of self-reproducing agents in it. Not all are of equal value - and few would argue with the claim that the AIDS virus should be exterminated. However, let's not pretend there's any scientific merit to the claim that our preferred bunch of information reproducers are the only kind that really matter.

Value in Universal Darwinism

Universal Darwinism leads to some ideas about values, goals and optimization targets:

• All values are based on copying with variation and selection;
• Adaptive evolution results in goal-directed systems.

The basic idea that values and evolution are intimately linked. Values come from evolution, and evolution produces values.

To expand on these ideas:

Copying-with-variation and selection is the basis of all non-trivial optimization processes

Trivial optimization processes include things like random search and exhaustive search which maintain little or no state between trials.

The basic idea is that all values come from evolving systems. Everyone is familiar with goal-directed behaviour that comes from genes. Much animal behaviour fits into this category. Another source of human goal-directed behaviour is memes. Catholic priests are typically not helping their genes to reproduce, it's memes that they labour for. The third main source of goal-directed behaviour is copied structures within minds - which can result in behaviour that produces pleasure, but is non-adaptive for memes and genes.

Note that the copying need not only consist of previously-successful solutions. Information about failures and mistakes could also be copied.

This is not a new idea - for example here's Evan Louis Sheenan in The Laughing Genes (page 79):

I want to make the point that survival, especially for our replicators, is necessarily at the root of all our oughts.

...and...

Replicator survival is the fundamental principle from which we derive all our oughts, even though it may not seem at all obvious to us.

The second part of the thesis is:

Cumulative evolutionary processes result in goal-directed systems

Cumulative evolution is the opposite of devolution. It's the sort of evolution that results in adaptive complexity - rather than the degeneration and eventual death that results from too-high a mutation rate.

In general, all adaptive evolution encourages variants which act as-though they have the goal of propagating themselves.

These ideas propose an intimate link between value and copying in a wide range of optimization processes. They link morality and ethics, evolutionism, and optimization strategies.