DAOs and the promotion of morality

Claim topic

ThePsychGuy

Column

Notes

Status

Open

Link: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vUJDhiIeR2vmBPMzK1K5OJxQPoyFnGSG2DDXuwWmuMI/edit?usp=drivesdk

We can make predictions, dear readers.

For example, we know you are going to raise a brow if we say that morality is really a game of numbers. It is an anticipated response from your end, the warm field of emotions and morality seems devoid of the cold analytical grasp of numbers. However, it still does not take away from the fact that we have been trying to decide upon the number of independent virtues from the time of ancient Greeks: Plato says four, Christianity believes in seven, and Judaism holds on to ten.

With our recent advancements in the world of science, we were quick to adopt a pragmatic viewpoint to analyze the structure of morality – form follows function – and we have been trying to study the function of morality to understand its constituents as well. Morality as Cooperation: A Problem-Centred Approach written by Dr. Oliver Scott Curry, an anthropologist at Oxford, explains how morality is simply an indicator for actions that promote cooperation. Cooperation, thus, becomes the ultimate metric of how moral our actions are in a particular context.

With increasing research on Game Theory, many sociologists – along with our friends at OlympusDAO – have realized that situations rarely are a zero-sum game. It is not necessary for all other players to lose if one claims the prize, rather it is quite the opposite. It is, in fact, beneficial for people to take a small cut in their gains and promote inclusivity. The obvious and hard reasoning lies behind the fact that times change – you never know who you are going to need after you invested in a bad fork – but there are powerful and implicit factors at play.

The truth is that helping feels good. Many theories exist about why altruism is the preferred option for normal people in general, but it is almost as if something deep down within us is hardwired to feel bad if we do not extend a hand. May the DAO gods curse mirror neurons! They give you the noticeably human ability to feel the pain of others.

As we explain DAOs to newcomers, a sudden conflict overtakes us: how is it decentralized and autonomous if there is governance involved? A simple answer here would be that just because something is organized (the clue is in the name: organization), it does not necessarily mean that it is erected upon oppressive power and exclusion. DAOs are, in fact, one of the most inclusive spaces available on the internet. If you are in touch with a DAO – if you are not, how are you even reading this? – we would like you to hop into a completely unrelated channel. Ask people to teach you the skills necessary to participate productively there and they will immediately try to hook you up with resources. Behavior like that is in stark contrast with how the off-chain organizations work: you will not be entertained at the interviews if you show up with practically zero experience.

It is a sad reality that most academicians in social sciences are oblivious to the world of cryptocurrency, let alone DAOs. We know that things are sped up in Web3 and DAOs can start, take off, and fall away in a matter of months (luckily, Bankless is not one of them because of the amazing people who work with us). It offers a new playground to tinker with and study the morality involved in financial transactions and group loyalty. While the definitions of a DAO are plenty, it is generally agreed that it is a collaborative effort. The success of a DAO largely depends upon the number of people it can gather as loyal supporters and news travels far and wide in Web3: make a bad move and your Twitter account will be blowing up the next minute.

In practice, DAOs manage to incentivize cooperation and promote altruism without the stereotypically associated downsides of having "less." Since the opportunities presented by Web3 are permissionless and not gated, no singular entity can create a functional deficit in resources. There remains enough cake for everyone to have a slice (or two, if they so wish). In a place where deficits do not exist and problems are solved through rewarded cooperation of people from all around the world, it is hard for anyone to behave immorally. Of course, scammers exist and there are many; however, if you are lucky enough to stick around for long enough, you will see a host of people from different backgrounds and limitations coming together to help others. Maybe one day the off-chain academia will give Web3 the attention it deserves with regards to psychological and anthropological inquiry; till then, DAOs remain the new playground of morality.

PS: if you were wondering, yes; mirror neurons are the ones which make yawning contagious.

DAOs and the promotion of morality

Claim topic

ThePsychGuy

Column

Notes

Status

Open

Link: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1vUJDhiIeR2vmBPMzK1K5OJxQPoyFnGSG2DDXuwWmuMI/edit?usp=drivesdk

We can make predictions, dear readers.

For example, we know you are going to raise a brow if we say that morality is really a game of numbers. It is an anticipated response from your end, the warm field of emotions and morality seems devoid of the cold analytical grasp of numbers. However, it still does not take away from the fact that we have been trying to decide upon the number of independent virtues from the time of ancient Greeks: Plato says four, Christianity believes in seven, and Judaism holds on to ten.

With our recent advancements in the world of science, we were quick to adopt a pragmatic viewpoint to analyze the structure of morality – form follows function – and we have been trying to study the function of morality to understand its constituents as well. Morality as Cooperation: A Problem-Centred Approach written by Dr. Oliver Scott Curry, an anthropologist at Oxford, explains how morality is simply an indicator for actions that promote cooperation. Cooperation, thus, becomes the ultimate metric of how moral our actions are in a particular context.

With increasing research on Game Theory, many sociologists – along with our friends at OlympusDAO – have realized that situations rarely are a zero-sum game. It is not necessary for all other players to lose if one claims the prize, rather it is quite the opposite. It is, in fact, beneficial for people to take a small cut in their gains and promote inclusivity. The obvious and hard reasoning lies behind the fact that times change – you never know who you are going to need after you invested in a bad fork – but there are powerful and implicit factors at play.

The truth is that helping feels good. Many theories exist about why altruism is the preferred option for normal people in general, but it is almost as if something deep down within us is hardwired to feel bad if we do not extend a hand. May the DAO gods curse mirror neurons! They give you the noticeably human ability to feel the pain of others.

As we explain DAOs to newcomers, a sudden conflict overtakes us: how is it decentralized and autonomous if there is governance involved? A simple answer here would be that just because something is organized (the clue is in the name: organization), it does not necessarily mean that it is erected upon oppressive power and exclusion. DAOs are, in fact, one of the most inclusive spaces available on the internet. If you are in touch with a DAO – if you are not, how are you even reading this? – we would like you to hop into a completely unrelated channel. Ask people to teach you the skills necessary to participate productively there and they will immediately try to hook you up with resources. Behavior like that is in stark contrast with how the off-chain organizations work: you will not be entertained at the interviews if you show up with practically zero experience.

It is a sad reality that most academicians in social sciences are oblivious to the world of cryptocurrency, let alone DAOs. We know that things are sped up in Web3 and DAOs can start, take off, and fall away in a matter of months (luckily, Bankless is not one of them because of the amazing people who work with us). It offers a new playground to tinker with and study the morality involved in financial transactions and group loyalty. While the definitions of a DAO are plenty, it is generally agreed that it is a collaborative effort. The success of a DAO largely depends upon the number of people it can gather as loyal supporters and news travels far and wide in Web3: make a bad move and your Twitter account will be blowing up the next minute.

In practice, DAOs manage to incentivize cooperation and promote altruism without the stereotypically associated downsides of having "less." Since the opportunities presented by Web3 are permissionless and not gated, no singular entity can create a functional deficit in resources. There remains enough cake for everyone to have a slice (or two, if they so wish). In a place where deficits do not exist and problems are solved through rewarded cooperation of people from all around the world, it is hard for anyone to behave immorally. Of course, scammers exist and there are many; however, if you are lucky enough to stick around for long enough, you will see a host of people from different backgrounds and limitations coming together to help others. Maybe one day the off-chain academia will give Web3 the attention it deserves with regards to psychological and anthropological inquiry; till then, DAOs remain the new playground of morality.

PS: if you were wondering, yes; mirror neurons are the ones which make yawning contagious.