Hawk-Dove and “Rights”
description
Transcript of Hawk-Dove and “Rights”
![Page 1: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Hawk-Dove and “Rights”
![Page 2: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Recall our puzzle from intro lecture:Where do “rights“ come from?
![Page 3: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Self evident? The creator?
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created
equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable
Rights…”
![Page 4: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Might?
![Page 5: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
The “state of nature”?
![Page 6: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
A “social contract”?
![Page 7: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
What does this mean?
![Page 8: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Today’s lecture is motivated by larger goal of understanding where human rights like those in the Declaration of Independence come from
We’ll develop a foundation for thinking about this puzzle
![Page 9: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
… using the Hawk-Dove game
![Page 10: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
First, let us discuss a related phenomena in animals
(Recall, our “parsimony” argument: if we see similar phenomena in animals, probably same cause)
![Page 12: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Territoriality:
Animal more likely to behave aggressively to defend a resource (land, mate, food) if arrived at first
![Page 14: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Even if arriving first doesn’t affect value of resource, or likelihood of winning combat
![Page 15: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Why would it matter if got there first?
![Page 16: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Will explain using (extension of) Hawk-Dove Game
Recall…
![Page 17: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Hawk-Dove
Object worth v>0Cost of fighting c>vGet object if only H, o/w split
v/2-c v
0 v/2
HD
H D
![Page 18: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
Now extend this game as follows:
Assume that can play “hawk if arrived first” (bourgeois)
Assume that randomly determined before each encounter who “arrived first”
![Page 19: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Hawk Dove
Hawk
Dove
Bourgeois
Bourgeois
v/2-c v, 0
0 v/2
½(v/2-c)+½v
v/4
v/23/4v½(v/2-c)
If play B and other plays H, half the time you arrive first, and both play hawk And get (v-c)/2, otherwise he arrives first and you play dove and he plays hawk, So get 0.
![Page 20: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
Hawk Dove
Hawk
Dove
Bourgeois
Bourgeois
v/2-c 20, 0
0 v/2
½(v/2-c)+½v
v/4
v/23/4v½(v/2-c)
-(B, B) is only “symmetric” (“pure”) Nash (will prove in homework)-Symmetric = where both players do same (makes sense when both drawn from singlepopulation)
![Page 21: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
In HW, you’ll also show that this Nash Equilibrium emerges in dynamics
![Page 22: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Thus, we expect animals to pay attention to who arrived first!
Even if arriving first has NO impact on value of resource or likelihood of winning combat
![Page 23: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
Note:
We could have written model where play Hawk if arrive second
Play Hawk if second would be unique symmetric equilibrium in that game as well
But we don’t ever observe Hawk if arrive second. Why not?
We’ll find out later in the semester!
![Page 24: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
“Who arrived first?” or “who arrived second?” are examples of…
![Page 25: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Uncorrelated asymmetry:
Difference between the two players that doesn’t (directly) impact payoffs
Another example: “who has darker skin?”
![Page 26: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Questions to keep in mind as today’s class progresses:
Which uncorrelated asymmetries can (in theory) dictate who plays hawk?
Which uncorrelated asymmetries in practice do (empirically) dictate who plays hawk?
We’ll start to address later today, and will have more insight at the end of the semester. But plenty more work can be done!
![Page 27: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
Now we will present evidence that H-D-B game explains animal territoriality
![Page 28: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
Wood speckled butterflies mate in sunspots in the forest
![Page 29: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
Males patrol these sunspots
![Page 30: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
And wait for females to come by
![Page 31: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/31.jpg)
Source: Davies 1978
![Page 32: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/32.jpg)
Spiral flight is symbolic:
Lasts <5 secsNeither male is hurtOriginal owner always wins
![Page 33: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/33.jpg)
Why don’t the butterflies actually fight over spots?
![Page 34: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/34.jpg)
Life is short (c is high) and spots are abundant (v is low)
So v < cB is equilibrium of this H-D-B game
![Page 35: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/35.jpg)
How can we be sure this isn’t driven by some kind of home court advantage?
![Page 36: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/36.jpg)
![Page 37: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/37.jpg)
What does this have to do with humans?
![Page 38: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/38.jpg)
In an experiment, humans did the same thing as the butterflies
![Page 39: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/39.jpg)
Multiple players simultaneously played a computer game
To stay alive, had to find berries in bushes
![Page 40: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/40.jpg)
When arrived at same bush, had to decide whether to fight or flee:
![Page 41: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/41.jpg)
Hawk Dove
Hawk
Dove
Bourgeois
Bourgeois
v/2-c 20, 0
0 v/2
½(v/2-c)+½v
v/4
v/23/4v½(v/2-c)
![Page 42: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/42.jpg)
Some players were bigger
Some players were healthier
![Page 43: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/43.jpg)
And some simply arrived first
![Page 44: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/44.jpg)
Turns out, arriving first matters a lot
(And matters more than being large or healthy)
![Page 45: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/45.jpg)
But arriving first stops mattering as much when lose H-D necessary condition for bourgeois equilibrium: v < c
![Page 46: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/46.jpg)
As H-D-B predicts, humans, like butterflies, attend to who arrived first even with size
difference
![Page 47: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/47.jpg)
“Who got there first?”
is just one example of an uncorrelated asymmetry
![Page 48: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/48.jpg)
What about in this real-world situation?
![Page 49: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/49.jpg)
![Page 50: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/50.jpg)
Why do you pay? Why not just leave?
If the cabby complains to a cop you can claim you paid in cash? No evidence that you didn’t
![Page 51: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/51.jpg)
If pay with cash, why doesn’t the cabby claim you didn’t pay even if you did?
You can’t complain to a cop—there’s no evidence that you paid
![Page 52: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/52.jpg)
Cabby gets angry if you didn’t already pay for the service
You get angry if you did pay for the service and he claims you didn’t
![Page 53: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/53.jpg)
Demand payment Don’t insist on payment
Refuse to pay
Agree to pay
Pay if haven’t
already paid
Insist if hasn’t already paid
$10-c, $10-c 20, 0
0, 20 10, 10
$10-c, $10-c
0, 20
0, 2010, 100, 20
The uncorrelated asymmetry
![Page 54: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/54.jpg)
Here are some more uncorrelated asymmetries
![Page 55: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/55.jpg)
In a study, subjects were asked to determine who deserved a found object and why for 10 legal cases
Source: DeScioli and Karpoff
![Page 56: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/56.jpg)
Commonly stated “why”s:
Who found the lost itemWhose land it was onWho lost itWho made it (like John Locke said)
![Page 57: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/57.jpg)
Note that the red “why”s don’t effect payoffs from keeping the object, and the others often
don’t either
These are examples of other uncorrelated asymmetries
![Page 58: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/58.jpg)
Also note the following pattern for uncorrelated asymmetries (we’ll come back to this late in the class)
Yes: Who got there firstNo: Who is taller
Yes: “One drop” or “one grandparent” ruleNo: Darker skin
Yes: Reserved for handicapped or pregnantNo: Reserved for people older than you
![Page 59: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/59.jpg)
Note that behavior in these examples is guided by emotions, and is not strategic or deliberative
![Page 60: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/60.jpg)
We get angry when:
We aren’t paid for our servicesSomeone takes something we made
And we play hawk when we’re angry
![Page 61: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/61.jpg)
Behavior in these examples could also be guided by beliefs / ideologies about what’s right
![Page 62: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/62.jpg)
We believe:
If I haven’t paid, the cabby is right to demand the money
If I made something, I am right to keep it
And we are willing to play hawk when our rights are violated
![Page 63: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/63.jpg)
And, of course, our emotions or ideologies are learned or evolved
If everyone believes it’s right to pay when you haven’t yet paid, and you deviate, you’ll get in a
lot of fights and quickly learn “what’s right”
You’ll show this in your HW simulation
![Page 64: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/64.jpg)
In addition to anger and beliefs/ideologies, there are other things that might guide our play
in Hawk-Dove
Here are two examples…
![Page 65: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/65.jpg)
Give ½ subjects in the lab a mug and ask them how much they’d sell them for
Average: $5.25
Give the other ½ $4.50 and ask them how much they’d pay for the mug
Average: $2.50
![Page 66: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/66.jpg)
We value things we possess more than identical things we don’t possess (even if possession is
randomly determined and short-lived)
![Page 67: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/67.jpg)
This is called the endowment effect
It is usually explained by loss aversion (harmed more by the loss of an item than benefit
from gaining identical item; see Kahneman, Knetsch, and Thaler 1990)
But that just begs the question, where does loss aversion come from?
![Page 68: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/68.jpg)
Hawk-Dove predicts that we fight harder for something we possess
One way to implement this is to get us to value things we possess more
This is the endowment effect (and loss aversion)
![Page 69: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/69.jpg)
Open question: Need to rule out alternative explanations
This would make a great final project!
Is the endowment effect specific to settings in which Hawk-Dove applies? I.e., is it about contested resources?
Do endowment effects show up for all uncorrelated asymmetries Does the endowment effect disappear for people who so strong
they always win, or in situations where the resource is super valuable?
![Page 70: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/70.jpg)
Another example…
![Page 71: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/71.jpg)
Ask ½ of subjects to build a piece of Ikea furniture
Ask the other ½ to simply inspect the identical piece of furniture
Then ask both groups how much they value it
![Page 72: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/72.jpg)
![Page 73: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/73.jpg)
This is called “The Ikea Effect”
One explanation for The Ikea Effect is the sunk cost fallacy
(when value something more than “should” because sunk work into it)
But where does the sunk cost fallacy come from?
![Page 74: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/74.jpg)
Hawk-Dove predicts that we fight harder for something we made
One way to implement this is to get us to value things we worked hard on more than identical things we didn’t
Another is the sunk cost fallacy!
![Page 75: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/75.jpg)
Open question: Need to rule out alternative explanations
This would make a great final project!
![Page 76: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/76.jpg)
Hawk-Dove can predicts that conflicts arise when there it isn’t clear who got there first
(Or who made the object, or… )
![Page 77: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/77.jpg)
Let’s go back to the butterflies
![Page 78: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/78.jpg)
What happens when there is ambiguity over who arrived first?
![Page 79: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/79.jpg)
They actually fight:
![Page 80: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/80.jpg)
And, again, same is true about us humans
![Page 81: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/81.jpg)
![Page 82: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/82.jpg)
“But in the ancient home we are welcomed heartily”
- Theodore Herzl
![Page 83: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/83.jpg)
“Our people will continue to fuel the torch of the revolution with rivers of blood until the whole of the occupied homeland is liberated…”
- Yasser Arafat
![Page 84: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/84.jpg)
![Page 85: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/85.jpg)
And conflict may also rise if two uncorrelated asymmetries apply, and they conflict
![Page 86: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/86.jpg)
Remember the 10 cases we referenced earlier?
Source: DeScioli and Karpoff
![Page 87: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/87.jpg)
In these and many other cases, the source of the dispute is two conflicting uncorrelated
asymmetries
E.g., You found it...
… on my land
![Page 88: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/88.jpg)
So far, we’ve been dealing with property rights
![Page 89: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/89.jpg)
Where do the human rights in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution come from?
![Page 90: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/90.jpg)
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created
equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable
Rights…”
![Page 91: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/91.jpg)
We think that with some modification, H-D-B provides the right framework for analysis
Here is some evidence for this…
![Page 92: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/92.jpg)
Historically, many human rights are extensions of early property rights
(E.g., “the pursuit of happiness” in our Declaration and “the king cannot grant anyone the right to take
an aid from his free men” in the Magna Carta”)
And rights such as self governance may have developed to protect property rights
![Page 93: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/93.jpg)
Additional evidence…
![Page 94: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/94.jpg)
We predict that rights conditioned on uncorrelated asymmetries, but not that these asymmetries are universal
Indeed, we see rights varying across geography
E.g., squatter’s rights in India or voting in North Korea
And over time
E.g., no taxation without representation, women’s vote
Note that Locke and the Founding Fathers would not have predicted this!
![Page 95: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/95.jpg)
But more evidence is needed!
(Ehem, final project, ehem)
![Page 96: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/96.jpg)
This foundation suggest the key insight from today’s lecture will hold for human rights, not
just property…
![Page 97: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/97.jpg)
Rights can be self- sustaining even if not given by God or social contract
We expect to have them, and a government that violates them should expect a revolution
(e.g., American Revolution)
![Page 98: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/98.jpg)
Rights are not God-given or inalienable, nor are all humans are born with them
Such beliefs are useful because prevent us from deviation and harm
But that doesn’t make them right
![Page 99: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/99.jpg)
Have we mentioned…
Evidence needed!
![Page 100: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/100.jpg)
Lots more open questions….
![Page 101: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/101.jpg)
For example…
Why do we have these particular rights?
Are some rights more inalienable than others?
![Page 102: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/102.jpg)
And…
Why do rights appear to be “increasing” over time? (See Pinker’s Better Angels)
![Page 103: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/103.jpg)
For example, collective punishment is decreasingly accepted:
“Thus says the Lord of hosts, ‘I have noted what Amalek did to Israel in opposing them on the way when they came up out of Egypt. 3 Now go and strike Amalek and devote to destruction all that they have. Do not spare them, but kill both man and woman, and infant, ox and sheep, camel and donkey." (1 Sam. 15:2-3).”
![Page 104: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/104.jpg)
![Page 105: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/105.jpg)
![Page 106: Hawk-Dove and “Rights”](https://reader036.fdocuments.us/reader036/viewer/2022081507/56816774550346895ddc6693/html5/thumbnails/106.jpg)
What’s the evidence that these rights are H-D?
What prescriptions does H-D give? Can it help us resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict?
These, too, would make great final projects!