One of my favourite television programmes is the BBC documentary
series Horizon. Horizon explores the social and
economic implications of innovations in scientific knowledge.
Thus it is more about the philosophy of science than the mechanics
of science.
In the last few months, BBC World has been rerunning the 1995
series of Horizon, screened in New Zealand in 1995 by ETV.
Two interesting programmes looked at biological conflict ("Foetal
Attraction", screened 28 September) and at the human propensity
of deception ("Liar", screened 5 October).
The first programme investigates a theory that pregnancy evolved
as an unstable equilibrium where the mother and the foetus compete
against each other for resources. Most of the time the efforts
of the one to better the other are met by an adequate response,
leading to an uneasy equilibrium. The quotes below give the gist
of the theory's flavour:
The reality of pregnancy is far from our ideal. So far in fact that that an Australian biologist [David Haig] is challenging the scientific community with a radical new theory:
"Scientists have traditionally assumed that pregnancy is basically a fundamentally harmonious process, where what is best for the foetus is always best for its mother. However I believe that my new evolutionary theory, which recognises a struggle for control during pregnancy, between the mother and the foetus, can help to explain some common medical complications."
"Evolution is sometimes thought of as being a bit like the free market with competition among different genes. And though rightwing economists like to think that free markets always lead to efficient outcomes, we only need to look at our cities and societies [to see] that we have problems, with unemployment, traffic jams etc. So that, sure there is a lot of progress in the evolutionary process, but as soon as there are genetic conflicts, you can result in very inefficient outcomes with all sorts of problems ... and by bringing in conflict we can explain how evolution can lead to such difficult medical problems."
- David Haig in "Foetal Attraction", Horizon, BBC 1995, screened BBC World, 28/9/97.
The mother seeks to restrict the baby to a manageably small size.
It is in the interest of her genes that the mother has many children
that survive long enough to themselves reproduce. The foetus,
on the other hand, expresses the conflicting interest of the father's
genes. In the biological environment from which we evolved, a
father's genes operated so as to maximise the health of each foetus,
favouring a high birth weight. The placenta is likened to a cancer
within the mother, acting on behalf of the father, through the
foetus.
The strategy works, in that reproduction does occur. It is the
free market strategy; the strategy acquired from the "jungle"
environment of biological laissez-faire. It is not an efficient
strategy. Medical problems arising during the pregnancy process
(and many after as well) occur because one party gets the better
of the other, putting the uneasy equilibrium out of sync. When
the mother gains an early victory, viable pregnancies are miscarried.
The irony is that, as in most wars that are, in the absence of
intervention, waged to their logical conclusion, victory to one
party is likely to result in the death of both.
The process was explicitly likened to economics, to the economics
of the real world rather than that of the idealistic "right
wing" textbooks. Explicit rivalry, not the harmonious competition
of Adam Smith, is the raw material of the evolution of economic
systems. Conflict is the dynamic force that makes long term economic
development and systemic change possible. It is a positive feedback
process, in which each strategy by one rival is met by the response
of the other. The driving force is the sequence of problems encountered
by economic 'actors' in dealing with their rivals - rival families,
rival firms, rival nations, rival classes, even rival genders.
The process of economic development, although it depends critically
on an unstable positive feedback process, is far from efficient.
Economic efficiency occurs when negative feedback acts to restore
stable equilibria, where there are no losers, and where systemic
change is driven only by exogenous forces. It is internal conflict,
however, not harmony that generates progressive development.
Whether such development is good or bad depends on each person's
subjective criteria. To many 'greens' the process of conflictdriven
growth will lead to global destruction. To others it will provide
the incentives for humankind to acquire the knowledge needed to
prevent environmental disasters. Indeed, such disasters happen
to societies in efficient equilibrium. Societies with a static
knowledge base slowly and innocently deplete their resources.
Do we get off the roller coaster, or do we learn to ride it while
maintaining our respect for it?
One of the strategies of the foetus is to deceive the mother into
being 'maternal', at least at the level of her own consciousness.
And the female sex drive itself can be seen as successful deception,
on behalf of the prospective father's genes. These deceptions
will limit the extent of a woman's response to such an invasive
biological process. Such deception is necessary for the reproduction
of our species. Otherwise, women would never allow themselves
to become mothers. Ultimate victory of the mother is the sexual
rejection of the wouldbe father or an abortion of her foetus.
On account of the interests of their own genes, however, mothers
must to some extent be seen as willing parties to the deceptions
that they fall for. They also deceive, to further the interests
of their genes. Reproduction is a 'game' of mutual deception.
The second Horizon programme was mostly about our ability
to detect lies. But its key theme was somewhat wider; it was about
the importance of strategy and deception in the creation of any
kind of social life. Just as our genes use deceptive strategies
in order to get the better of rival genes, private individuals
and people in public life use deceptive strategies all the time
to make their way in the world. While these strategies ensure
that there is nothing efficient about our socioeconomic
interactions, they do drive the process of human evolution, on
balance for the better. Human society is, at core, a Faustian
bargain. It couldn't be otherwise.
Liar concluded with the view that a genuinely successful
liedetection technology would be quite Orwellian in its
implications. (Indeed, cinema patrons managed to get a good laugh
on this theme recently, care of the film Lawyer, Lawyer;
sorry Liar, Liar.) A world without lies would be an "autistic
utopia", an oxymoron if ever there was one. The following
quotations convey the flavour of Liar:
"What kind of society would it be if science could create a world where every lie was exposed, where absolute truth becomes the rule? Some children already live in such a world. They are completely and often brutally honest. They do not know how to lie. They are autistic. And such children find it difficult or impossible to understand that other people have thoughts and feelings."
"Quite a small region of the brain was specifically involved in stories to do with thoughts and feelings where mindreading was involved. So stories about deception and doublebluff activated a particular part of the brain that stories about physical events didn't require."
"Children with autism are well known for not telling lies. They are typically very honest and also very naive about other people's possible deceptions. ... The inability to read people's minds and to understand mistaken belief cuts autistic people off from fiction and entertainment. ... With autism we see a case of a person who is mind blind, who cannot understand people's thoughts and feelings. It makes clear that deception is part and parcel of really a wonderful positive social ability. So if you cannot tell lies it is also very likely that you cannot understand how to cooperate with somebody, how to communicate with somebody. So being able to manipulate somebody's beliefs in a bad way is part and parcel of being able to manipulate their beliefs in a good way, as we do all the time in social interaction and when we communicate."
"We use language and lying to manoeuvre through the world, as humans always have.... Some scientists; some evolutionary psychologists even go so far as to suppose that our species developed language mainly for the purpose of being able to deceive; to use it for lying. ... A world without lying wouldn't last very long. We have to get along socially in the same way as they say hedgehogs make love - very carefully.... Liars are popular; they please people. But people who tell the truth bluntly; they can become very unpopular. I don't think life is conceivable in the light of absolute truth. And I'm sorry if that offends some people who want us the beat the swords into ploughshares and find a utopia."
- various speakers from "Liar", Horizon, BBC 1995, screened BBC World, 5/10/97.
Human evolution works through empathy and the dynamics of deception;
not through utopian innocence. Autistic people have no empathy.
A society made up of people who cannot conceive of deception cannot
grow.
A world that exploits empathy to deceive is not necessarily the
amoral world that it at first seems. Deception is simply a part
of the process of negotiating life; the process of making good
bargains on behalf of the constituents of the deceiving agent.
It is by no means the only part of the process; deception is only
one aspect of empathy. And lies are only an extreme and often
ineffective form of deception; a form of deception that nevertheless
may have a moral purpose and does not always have victims.
Social evolution works best when people do not trust their governments;
when deceived subjects learn to recognise when they are being
deceived, and how they are being deceived, and how to make bargains
with their deceivers. Good bargains between rivals may require
a bit of counterdeception. That's politics. And that's life.
The trick is to be awake to deception, and to have some fun in
the process. Politics taken too seriously is bad politics; I agree
with Richard Prebble about this, if nothing else. Rather than
be outraged by falling for the politics of deception - eg by Winston
Peters jumping right instead of left - the political Left (who,
by definition, represent the underprivileged) must develop new
strategies and new agendas. But they must never cease to act in
the interests of their constituents.
The Left should seek to manipulate the Right into supporting policies that they intuitively reject; policies that are good for the constituency of the Left but which are not necessarily bad for the constituency of the Right. This has happened in the past; for example, when, after World War 2, the Right joined the consensus in favour of the welfare state. But, to deceive in this way, the Left must use their brains. Moral outrage at the antics of the Right is never enough.
Political evolution depends on deception and counter-deception. If, in a constitutional democracy, the many find themselves being ruled by the few, then it can only be because they are being deceived. Progress takes place when that deception is countered. As embryos we deceive our mothers into not spontaneously aborting us, at least 50% of the time. If we can do that, then surely, as adults, we can outmanoeuvre a few blueshirts, most of the time. Indeed we did just that by getting a Parliament elected by proportional representation, having deceived the National Government into holding the required referenda.
The blue-shirtcliffe's of this world fight back, however, with new forms of deception. They rely on people like Phil Goff to oppose MMP, and Mike Moore to promote the globalisation of investment as a fait accompli. They are forever seeking to recreate their Culture of Contentment, as J.K. Galbraith's book eloquently explains.
The plebeians should never stop manipulating the patricians into taking a wider view of their self-interest, and without resorting to damned lies. Deception is not always immoral.
 Back to: Rankin File Archive |
 Go to Keith Rankin's page |
( viewings since 28 Dec.'97: )