If you are looking for a rich text to document both the coherence and incoherence of a scientific concept look no further than this NYT article on evolution and lying. A few quick points: I do love how intentional behavior is attributed by both scientists and the journalist to creatures that too many humans would call, at best, "dumb." (Note here that I think that animal communication is "intentional" in ways that cover lies and other deceptions by humans.) A cybernetic account of the emergence and persistence of an attribute within an ecology would help side-step many of the philosophical problems with the words "lying" and "deception." I would be curious to follow the subsequent amplification of this account of "deception" as the underlying ideas leach into our culture.
Comments