In many ways, morality is an emergent phenomenon of intelligence. It takes intelligence to come up with nuclear / chemical / biological weapons, but it takes mo

In many ways, morality is an emergent phenomenon of intelligence. It takes intelligence to come up with nuclear / chemical / biological weapons, but it takes morality to avoid their use. You could say that this particular morality is based on game theory, but you could also say that people, in general, don't want to hurt other people. The reality is going to be some mish-mash of states between those two theories. Virtue signalling as a concept may be about advertising morality, but that morality is probably going to be informed by intelligence. Let's assume that in any given debate interaction each side starts with n points. If you "virtue signal" you gain zero points, if you make a fact based / logical argument you gain 2 points. If you make a non-fact based/ illogical argument, you lose 2 points, and if you make and ad-hominem / derogatory comment you lose 1 point. You can win this debate by a combination of insults and facts, but you'll win it faster without the insults. Conversely, you'll lose the debate really quickly by not presenting any facts / logic, and only resorting to insults.