What do you think?
Rate this book
Virtue Signaling: Essays on Darwinian Politics & Free Speech
'Virtue signaling' is the phrase that got popular on social media during the 2016 election as a way of derogating political opponents. But what is virtue signaling, really? How does it work, where does it come from, and is it really a bad thing? How can it help people to virtue signaling better -- when you're doing it, and when your friends, family, colleagues, and mates are doing it?
This short, thoughtful, easy-to-read book is about how we can better understand people's instincts to show off our moral virtues, personality traits, ideologies, political attitudes, and lifestyle choices through our public behavior and language, from dating to street protests to social media to academic censorship. It shows how virtue signaling is the key to understanding current debates about free speech and viewpoint diversity on campuses, in corporations, and throughout society.
Understanding virtue signaling is a social superpower, like understanding body language, or personality traits, or sex differences. Are you curious why politics and religion lead to so many bitter debates around the Thanksgiving dinner table -- even among relatives who get along in every other domain? Or why so many single people put 'No Trump supporters!' or 'No Libtards!' on the dating profiles -- when politics plays such a small role in day-to-day relationships? Or why Gen Z college students want to censor ideas they think are evil -- when they're supposed to be exposing themselves to diverse perspectives?
Virtue signaling is one of those concepts that's easy to understand, but that most people don't bother to face -- because we're all doing it all the time, and acknowledging our own virtue signaling makes us feel embarrassed and hypocritical.
Let's face the reality of virtue signaling.
This book offers a scientifically grounded, practical, non-partisan set of insights so you understand your own ideological passions, your relationships, and your society much more easily. If you don't understand your own virtue signaling, then your ideologies and signaling habits, not your conscious mind, are running your life. If you don't understand other people's virtue signaling, then it's hard to take their point of view and to find common ground with them. If you don't understanding virtue signaling in the political realm, it's hard to convince other citizens to support your causes, policies, and candidates.
This book collects seven essays written from 1996 through 2018. They're all focused around the evolutionary psychology of politics, ethics, and language. It includes a new preface, new introductions that give the backstory to each essay, and a new list of further readings (including about 100 books by other people).
The book is about 32,000 words, or about 85-130 pages depending on your reader format.
This short, thoughtful, easy-to-read book is about how we can better understand people's instincts to show off our moral virtues, personality traits, ideologies, political attitudes, and lifestyle choices through our public behavior and language, from dating to street protests to social media to academic censorship. It shows how virtue signaling is the key to understanding current debates about free speech and viewpoint diversity on campuses, in corporations, and throughout society.
Understanding virtue signaling is a social superpower, like understanding body language, or personality traits, or sex differences. Are you curious why politics and religion lead to so many bitter debates around the Thanksgiving dinner table -- even among relatives who get along in every other domain? Or why so many single people put 'No Trump supporters!' or 'No Libtards!' on the dating profiles -- when politics plays such a small role in day-to-day relationships? Or why Gen Z college students want to censor ideas they think are evil -- when they're supposed to be exposing themselves to diverse perspectives?
Virtue signaling is one of those concepts that's easy to understand, but that most people don't bother to face -- because we're all doing it all the time, and acknowledging our own virtue signaling makes us feel embarrassed and hypocritical.
Let's face the reality of virtue signaling.
This book offers a scientifically grounded, practical, non-partisan set of insights so you understand your own ideological passions, your relationships, and your society much more easily. If you don't understand your own virtue signaling, then your ideologies and signaling habits, not your conscious mind, are running your life. If you don't understand other people's virtue signaling, then it's hard to take their point of view and to find common ground with them. If you don't understanding virtue signaling in the political realm, it's hard to convince other citizens to support your causes, policies, and candidates.
This book collects seven essays written from 1996 through 2018. They're all focused around the evolutionary psychology of politics, ethics, and language. It includes a new preface, new introductions that give the backstory to each essay, and a new list of further readings (including about 100 books by other people).
The book is about 32,000 words, or about 85-130 pages depending on your reader format.
137 pages, Kindle Edition
Published September 17, 2019
About the author
Geoffrey Miller
26 books632 followersMy list of 400+ recommended nonfiction books is here, organized by topics: https://www.primalpoly.com/recommende...
'Virtue Signaling' is my new ebook available now on Amazon: https://amzn.to/2O62gGJ
Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/geoffrey_miller
YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/geoffreymille...
Website: https://www.primalpoly.com/
Twitter: https://twitter.com/primalpoly
Geoffrey F. Miller, Associate Professor of Psychology at the University of New Mexico, is an American evolutionary psychologist, and author of four books.
He's interested in psychology, polyamory, politics, Effective Altruism, existential risk, AI, animal welfare, and science fiction.
Miller is a 1987 graduate of Columbia University, where he earned a BA in biology and psychology. He received his PhD in cognitive psychology from Stanford University in 1993 under the guidance of Roger N. Shepard. He was a postdoctoral researcher in the evolutionary and adaptive systems group in the School of Cognitive and Computing Sciences at the University of Sussex, UK (1992–94); Research Scientist at the Center for Adaptive Behavior and Cognition, Max Planck Institute for Psychological Research, Munich, Germany (1995–96); Senior Research Fellow, Centre for Economic Learning and Social Evolution, University College London (1996–2000); he has worked at the University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, since 2001, where he is now Associate Professor. In 2009, he was Visiting Scientist, Genetic Epidemiology Group, Queensland Institute of Medical Research, Brisbane, Australia.
'Virtue Signaling' is my new ebook available now on Amazon: https://amzn.to/2O62gGJ
Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/geoffrey_miller
YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/geoffreymille...
Website: https://www.primalpoly.com/
Twitter: https://twitter.com/primalpoly
Geoffrey F. Miller, Associate Professor of Psychology at the University of New Mexico, is an American evolutionary psychologist, and author of four books.
He's interested in psychology, polyamory, politics, Effective Altruism, existential risk, AI, animal welfare, and science fiction.
Miller is a 1987 graduate of Columbia University, where he earned a BA in biology and psychology. He received his PhD in cognitive psychology from Stanford University in 1993 under the guidance of Roger N. Shepard. He was a postdoctoral researcher in the evolutionary and adaptive systems group in the School of Cognitive and Computing Sciences at the University of Sussex, UK (1992–94); Research Scientist at the Center for Adaptive Behavior and Cognition, Max Planck Institute for Psychological Research, Munich, Germany (1995–96); Senior Research Fellow, Centre for Economic Learning and Social Evolution, University College London (1996–2000); he has worked at the University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, since 2001, where he is now Associate Professor. In 2009, he was Visiting Scientist, Genetic Epidemiology Group, Queensland Institute of Medical Research, Brisbane, Australia.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 15 of 15 reviews
March 2, 2020
I have seen some of Geoffrey's work, and I was impressed by his analysis and knowledge. When I saw that he released a book, I was quite excited and ordered it when a paperback version was available.
I was somewhat disappointed that he did not actually write a book. Rather, it's a collection of pieces he has previously written. The oldest is over 20 years at this point. Nevertheless, I did enjoy the essays, and the collection does make some sense in the grand scheme of the narrative he is presenting. While I enjoyed it, I still feel like it was somewhat lazy, and the content would be better and more coherent if he had just taken the time to write a book from scratch, which wouldn't him that much time given how much material and experience he has on the topic.
The main essay of the book, the one with the most value and that I enjoyed the most, was a paper he wrote in 2007, titled "Sexual selection for moral virtues". It argues that moral virtues, like honesty and kindness, evolved because they are sexually attractive. They advertise genetic quality (for example, good mental health), good parenting abilities and relationship skills. Since they are hard to fake signals (because of the fitness cost), they are reliable and tend to be selected for.
The rough sketch of many of our prized virtues isn't exclusively human. They can be traced to social primates, and sometimes just mammals in general. They can evolve by kin selection, reciprocal altruism, group selection, and more. His argument is that sexual selection in specific is what amplified our moral dimension to such a great degree. While moral philosophy sees morality within actions (X is good, Y is evil), this evolutionary approach sees morality as a judgment of individual character. The point isn't what action is moral, but rather which individual is a moral one. The paper is quite long and goes into many other facets of the sexual selection of virtue, including personality, intelligence, courtship, virtue ethics, and more. It's well written and worth a second read which I will do at some point.
The rest of the book is smaller essays, most political related to virtue signaling and free speech. I found all of them decent, but I'm somewhat tired of the topic, and I didn't get that much out of it. One essay is an exception, "The neurodiversity case for free speech". While I wasn't new to the argument, it was very well written, and an incredibly important topic that is rarely talked about.
Overall it was a pleasant read, and I hope he publishes more in the future. The more evolutionary theory and the less politics, the better.
I was somewhat disappointed that he did not actually write a book. Rather, it's a collection of pieces he has previously written. The oldest is over 20 years at this point. Nevertheless, I did enjoy the essays, and the collection does make some sense in the grand scheme of the narrative he is presenting. While I enjoyed it, I still feel like it was somewhat lazy, and the content would be better and more coherent if he had just taken the time to write a book from scratch, which wouldn't him that much time given how much material and experience he has on the topic.
The main essay of the book, the one with the most value and that I enjoyed the most, was a paper he wrote in 2007, titled "Sexual selection for moral virtues". It argues that moral virtues, like honesty and kindness, evolved because they are sexually attractive. They advertise genetic quality (for example, good mental health), good parenting abilities and relationship skills. Since they are hard to fake signals (because of the fitness cost), they are reliable and tend to be selected for.
The rough sketch of many of our prized virtues isn't exclusively human. They can be traced to social primates, and sometimes just mammals in general. They can evolve by kin selection, reciprocal altruism, group selection, and more. His argument is that sexual selection in specific is what amplified our moral dimension to such a great degree. While moral philosophy sees morality within actions (X is good, Y is evil), this evolutionary approach sees morality as a judgment of individual character. The point isn't what action is moral, but rather which individual is a moral one. The paper is quite long and goes into many other facets of the sexual selection of virtue, including personality, intelligence, courtship, virtue ethics, and more. It's well written and worth a second read which I will do at some point.
The rest of the book is smaller essays, most political related to virtue signaling and free speech. I found all of them decent, but I'm somewhat tired of the topic, and I didn't get that much out of it. One essay is an exception, "The neurodiversity case for free speech". While I wasn't new to the argument, it was very well written, and an incredibly important topic that is rarely talked about.
Overall it was a pleasant read, and I hope he publishes more in the future. The more evolutionary theory and the less politics, the better.
December 27, 2020
8.5/10.
The essays on costly signaling and handicap theory are worth the price of the book, and can change the way you view evolution (and the world). The chapter on Damore is decent - it's relatively milquetoast, but it is a defense. The prediction that evolutionary or naturalistic ethics will eventually become analogous to recondite higher mathematics is worrying.
0.5 added for the extensive bibliography of evolutionary psychology work. However, seminal works such as Race, Evolution, Behavior and On Genetic Interests are unconscionably omitted.
The essays on costly signaling and handicap theory are worth the price of the book, and can change the way you view evolution (and the world). The chapter on Damore is decent - it's relatively milquetoast, but it is a defense. The prediction that evolutionary or naturalistic ethics will eventually become analogous to recondite higher mathematics is worrying.
0.5 added for the extensive bibliography of evolutionary psychology work. However, seminal works such as Race, Evolution, Behavior and On Genetic Interests are unconscionably omitted.
November 14, 2020
Great insights on what virtue signalling is, when it goes well and when it goes poorly and how current virtue signalling leaves behind the neuro divergent
December 29, 2020
This book is not about virtue signaling, despite the author throwing that expression casually every now and then. An interest assort of essays to be sure, just not about virtue signaling per se.
May 3, 2021
Natural selection, or the differential reproductive success of organisms, depends on those characteristics of the individual that interact with its environment (phenotype). A predominant element in human environments has always been the presence of other humans, so it follows that natural selection includes the interaction between different individuals' phenotypes (e.g., kin selection, group selection, sexual selection). Resulting adaptations can then be understood as a somewhat delicate balance between "selfishness" (to increase one's own survival and reproductive success) and "altruism" (to entice others into tit-for-tat cooperation and even mating, or to increase our potential mates' survival, for example).
Human language evolved as a tool for interaction between individuals. With it we can share useful information in an efficient way (we tell someone where to find berries, instead of spending time and energy walking with them to show them where), but we can also signal our individual virtues. For instance, language that is rich in content (such as complex theories and fictions) serves as a signal (it doesn't matter if deliberate or not) of intelligence, which is critical for human survival and reproductive success. Any listeners (or readers) picking up a signal of another individual's intelligence might be enticed to cooperate with them (viz. reciprocal altruism), or sexually attracted to them, or warned about their skills as a competitor, etc.
From a sexual selection perspective, and with females being the choosier of the two sexes because they invest more in each gamete, it is males who spend more resources (think sex-typical roles in human courtship) and take more risks (think male overrepresentation in anything from dirty talk to extreme ideologies) when signaling -in general but also through language- "good gene, good partner, and good parent" traits. (Of course, females also exhibit their sexual attractiveness, in their own ways -verbal and non-verbal- and insofar as male investment in a long-term relationship and in offspring is non-negligible.) When discussing political ideologies in the context of sexual selection, Miller acknowledges that sex-typical political tendencies contribute to explaining the dimorphism of sexual attractiveness traits:
It remains to be seen, however, if the current political polarization across the West is somehow linked to (viz. a reaction to) the widely reported decline of sexual activity, particularly among younger generations.
Human language evolved as a tool for interaction between individuals. With it we can share useful information in an efficient way (we tell someone where to find berries, instead of spending time and energy walking with them to show them where), but we can also signal our individual virtues. For instance, language that is rich in content (such as complex theories and fictions) serves as a signal (it doesn't matter if deliberate or not) of intelligence, which is critical for human survival and reproductive success. Any listeners (or readers) picking up a signal of another individual's intelligence might be enticed to cooperate with them (viz. reciprocal altruism), or sexually attracted to them, or warned about their skills as a competitor, etc.
From a sexual selection perspective, and with females being the choosier of the two sexes because they invest more in each gamete, it is males who spend more resources (think sex-typical roles in human courtship) and take more risks (think male overrepresentation in anything from dirty talk to extreme ideologies) when signaling -in general but also through language- "good gene, good partner, and good parent" traits. (Of course, females also exhibit their sexual attractiveness, in their own ways -verbal and non-verbal- and insofar as male investment in a long-term relationship and in offspring is non-negligible.) When discussing political ideologies in the context of sexual selection, Miller acknowledges that sex-typical political tendencies contribute to explaining the dimorphism of sexual attractiveness traits:
Given the well-documented, cross-culturally universal sex differences in human mate choice criteria, with men favoring younger, fertile women, and women favoring older, higher-status, richer men, the expression of more liberal ideologies by women and more conservative ideologies by men is not surprising. Men use political conservatism to (unconsciously) advertise their likely social and economic dominance; women use political liberalism to advertise their nurturing abilities. The shift from liberal youth to conservative middle age reflects a mating-relevant increase in social dominance and earnings power, not just a rational shift in one’s self-interest.
It remains to be seen, however, if the current political polarization across the West is somehow linked to (viz. a reaction to) the widely reported decline of sexual activity, particularly among younger generations.
May 3, 2020
Effective Altruism'in kabul etmeyeceğini bildiğin bir alanda savunuculuk yapmaya devam etmek ne kadar zor bir şey ya. Ayrıca iletişimciler olarak verin bize meseleyle ilgili o tweetleri, RT'leri, beğenileri. Veriiin cheap virtue signaling. Veriiin. Köylü gibi işe yaramayacağını bile bile istiyoruz biz onları ya.
Bilmiyorum, editörden baskı gelmiş ve virtue signaling işini başkasına kaptırmadan şu kitabı çıkaralım demişler gibi. Ama sadece kampüslerdeki neurodiversity hareketi için bile ok. 4'ü bastım.
Bilmiyorum, editörden baskı gelmiş ve virtue signaling işini başkasına kaptırmadan şu kitabı çıkaralım demişler gibi. Ama sadece kampüslerdeki neurodiversity hareketi için bile ok. 4'ü bastım.
November 7, 2020
IIdo
If this were a just world, Miller would have gotten a Nobel at least a decade ago! I still do not know how or whether sex selection is a case of Darwinian selection. Maybe it is because there is no adequate formal axiomatic foudation, despite Mary Williams,s efforts.
If this were a just world, Miller would have gotten a Nobel at least a decade ago! I still do not know how or whether sex selection is a case of Darwinian selection. Maybe it is because there is no adequate formal axiomatic foudation, despite Mary Williams,s efforts.
December 22, 2019
The principle of virtue signaling as the underlying motivation for many many behaviors seems very plausible.
July 4, 2023
“We all virtue signal. I virtue signal; you virtue signal; we virtue signal. And those guys over there, in that political tribe we don’t like – they especially virtue signal. (Just as they believe we do.)” God, what a perfect intro.
Geoffrey Miller is a giant in the field of evolutionary psychology, and this collection of essays strongly builds on his previous works that show how most of human behavior, culture, and ideologies are at their essence complex courtship displays. This book gets pretty academic, but brings so much clarity as to why we behave the way we do.
Some items I’m hoping to remember:
“Many pro-social behaviors that were assumed to arise through kinship or reciprocity are now thought to have emerged as costly signals of individual fitness, favored by social and sexual selection.”
“Human males face higher variance in reproductive success, so are predicted to allocate somewhat more energy, time, and risk to mating effort, including costly, dangerous, public displays of moral virtue.”
“Most virtue-displays should peak in young adulthood, at the peak of mating effort. They should be low before puberty, should increase rapidly thereafter, and should decline gradually as individuals shift their time and energy from courtship to parenting.”
On how the two core assumptions of DEI efforts are diametrically opposed: “1) The human sexes and races have exactly the same minds, with precisely identical distributions of traits, aptitudes, interests, and motivations; therefore, any inequalities of outcome in hiring and promotion must be due to systemic sexism and racism. 2) The human sexes and races have such radically different minds, backgrounds, perspectives, and insights, that companies must increase their demographic diversity in order to be competitive; any lack of demographic diversity must be due to short-sighted management that favors groupthink.”
Geoffrey Miller is a giant in the field of evolutionary psychology, and this collection of essays strongly builds on his previous works that show how most of human behavior, culture, and ideologies are at their essence complex courtship displays. This book gets pretty academic, but brings so much clarity as to why we behave the way we do.
Some items I’m hoping to remember:
“Many pro-social behaviors that were assumed to arise through kinship or reciprocity are now thought to have emerged as costly signals of individual fitness, favored by social and sexual selection.”
“Human males face higher variance in reproductive success, so are predicted to allocate somewhat more energy, time, and risk to mating effort, including costly, dangerous, public displays of moral virtue.”
“Most virtue-displays should peak in young adulthood, at the peak of mating effort. They should be low before puberty, should increase rapidly thereafter, and should decline gradually as individuals shift their time and energy from courtship to parenting.”
On how the two core assumptions of DEI efforts are diametrically opposed: “1) The human sexes and races have exactly the same minds, with precisely identical distributions of traits, aptitudes, interests, and motivations; therefore, any inequalities of outcome in hiring and promotion must be due to systemic sexism and racism. 2) The human sexes and races have such radically different minds, backgrounds, perspectives, and insights, that companies must increase their demographic diversity in order to be competitive; any lack of demographic diversity must be due to short-sighted management that favors groupthink.”
January 22, 2022
A bit of a heavier read compared to GM's prior books Mating Mind / Spent, still no less thought provoking than the his prior work.
GM further develops his "signalling theory" work by further empahsising Zahavi's "handicap" principle. Reflected by the political behavior of US college students "political peacocks" from GM's anectodal experiences has been fun to read. The section about moral virtues and vices in mate selection is a bit difficult to penetrate into. Good for understanding his scientific method and thinking though.
Intrigued by the part where he mentions GameTheory involvement of his work and the Nash Equilibria to asses the stability and significance of evolutionary adaptations.
The paper where he calls the "neurodivergent" and the "neurominorities" to rise! was fun to read. Should be considered by I&D programmesthe big tech.
Reading his books, one cannot help but wonder is all human social behavior just signalling automata?
GM further develops his "signalling theory" work by further empahsising Zahavi's "handicap" principle. Reflected by the political behavior of US college students "political peacocks" from GM's anectodal experiences has been fun to read. The section about moral virtues and vices in mate selection is a bit difficult to penetrate into. Good for understanding his scientific method and thinking though.
Intrigued by the part where he mentions GameTheory involvement of his work and the Nash Equilibria to asses the stability and significance of evolutionary adaptations.
The paper where he calls the "neurodivergent" and the "neurominorities" to rise! was fun to read. Should be considered by I&D programmesthe big tech.
Reading his books, one cannot help but wonder is all human social behavior just signalling automata?
February 8, 2022
This little book Virtue Signaling : Essays on Darwinian politics and free speech has very little in the way of politics or free speech except for the last two essays. The author goes over his view of virtue signaling based on scientific evidence increasingly complex essays but still accessible. He argues that virtue signaling is part natural selection and sexual selection which he views in mostly positive light. He never succumbed to the naturalist fallacy even arguing that a universal morality is probably impossible. I read this using a Kindle unlimited plan but the book is really affordable not to mention that extensive list of resources recommended make it a good starting point for this branch of evolutionary psychology. After reading this book you will never look at morality the same way again. This man has strong views but by no means an ideological person.
April 3, 2024
Evolutionary psychologist Geoffrey Miller gives the reader a great in depth understanding of why people virtue signal by announcing their politics. Like a peacock who’s giant tail is essentially useless, virtue signaling is little more than saying “look at me!” He notes that in the 1980s, radical students were more likely to bash Reagan in their dorm rooms than to actually vote for Mondale. Little has changed since then.
January 29, 2021
Virtue signalling, we all do it. What if it has darwinist roots akin to self handicapping/conspicuous consumption and its western incarnations commonly discriminate against different neurologies and cultures?
February 13, 2021
Raises a few good points - but lots of equivocation, rambling, convolution for the sake of convolution ...
Read
October 9, 2021Great intro to the concept...
Displaying 1 - 15 of 15 reviews