Audiobooks I completed in 2017

Books I completed in 2017

My favorite books I read this year

Why Buddhism is True by Robert Wright, 2017

The Three Languages of Politics by Arnold Kling, 2017

The Clock of the Long Now by Stewart Brand, 1999

I would guess that both "Three Languages" and "Long Now" would appeal to most LW readers.

Hillbilly Elegy by J.D. Vance, 2016

The Mating Mind by Geoffrey Miller, 2000

Sex at Dawn by Christopher Ryan and Cacilda Jetha, 2010

Spent: Sex, Evolution, and Consumer Behavior by Geoffrey Miller, 2009

Ambient Findability by Peter Morville, 2005

The Spoils of War by Bruce Bueno de Mesquita and Alastair Smith, 2016

Future Sex by Emily Witt, 2016

The Doors of Perception by Aldous Huxley

Review: https://digitalsauna.wordpress.com/2017/07/05/the-doors-of-perception-by-aldous-huxley-1954/

Language at the Speed of Sight by Mark Seidenberg

Review: https://digitalsauna.wordpress.com/2017/07/05/language-at-the-speed-of-sight-by-mark-seidenberg-2017/

Paying for it by Chester Brown

Review: https://digitalsauna.wordpress.com/2017/07/18/paying-for-it-by-chester-brown-2011/

Autobiography by John Stuart Mill

Review: https://digitalsauna.wordpress.com/2017/07/19/autobiography-by-john-stuart-mill-1873/

Exit West by Moshin Haimd

Review: https://digitalsauna.wordpress.com/2017/07/31/exit-west-by-moshin-hamid-2017/

Thanks, should be working now.

Yes, you've hit on the main point. Survival (and later on, reproductive value) is what matters. The fact that the maps help them survive is what matters. The existence of the map or its accuracy matters only matters in so far as it contributes to reproductive success.

Natural selection doesn't "reward" them for having an accurate map, only a map that helps they live and reproduce.

I agree that "limited" is a better word than "horrible".

What I meant by "horrible" is that, relative to human maps, ant maps are extremely limited; they do not represent "truth" or reality as well to the same scope or accuracy of human maps.

I think the point is that even though ant maps are limited, they can still be adaptive. Natural selection is indifferent to the scope/accuracy of a map in and of itself.

Because the truth, even in small matters like snake coloration, can make a difference, the original quotation is an overstatement.

All natural selection "cares about" is genes copied. Claws, peacock tail feathers, and "maps" can all "make a difference," but natural selection only acts on the results (genes copied); natural selection itself doesn't favor any particular kind of adaptation, that's why I think the original quote is not an overstatement.