people developed a whole set of social norms to deal with conflict situations and etc.
I see these as tools and not norms. Thus I see the apparent "norms" as derived from the optimality of the behaviour. When conditions are static, these choces, which are initially rational, may indeed become rigid norms. We could see this in the Chinese history, when a very rational work of Confucius became a set of norms. But this does not negate the initial forgotten rationality of these norms. Moreover, from Chinese history of 19th-20th century, we can see how that rigidization of rational choices in changed circumstances resulted in tons of suffering. I certainly prefer the Japanese way, when on the second, stronger arrival of Europeans (well, this time Americans) they decided to be rational and not traditional (normative).
Concerning AI, I expect it to look like it follows norms while being only rational.
I have talked about norms vs. rationality in Russian (http://vi-z.livejournal.com/117298.html) some time ago.
Re: PS
I see these as tools and not norms. Thus I see the apparent "norms" as derived from the optimality of the behaviour. When conditions are static, these choces, which are initially rational, may indeed become rigid norms. We could see this in the Chinese history, when a very rational work of Confucius became a set of norms. But this does not negate the initial forgotten rationality of these norms. Moreover, from Chinese history of 19th-20th century, we can see how that rigidization of rational choices in changed circumstances resulted in tons of suffering. I certainly prefer the Japanese way, when on the second, stronger arrival of Europeans (well, this time Americans) they decided to be rational and not traditional (normative).
Concerning AI, I expect it to look like it follows norms while being only rational.
I have talked about norms vs. rationality in Russian (http://vi-z.livejournal.com/117298.html) some time ago.