Sunday, May 24, 2020

The science behind human irrationality just passed a huge test — Cathleen O'Grady

Behavioral economics vindicated.

This 1979 Kahneman-Tversky study and its contemporary replication is about loss aversion. There are many, many more cognitive-affective biases affecting rationality. There is also illogic, since most people are not trained in either critical thinking or rigorous scientific method, and mathematical innumeracy is high, especially when the long term is included, as it is in many economists' assumptions about rationality and maximization.

Then there is connotation of terms in addition to denotation, where the connotation carries an emotional charge. Persuasion — real advertising, PR and propaganda — are based on this.

People also often choose and act against their own assumed "better" interests eg., economic interests, since interest is determined by values and people often hold a value system that subordinates one set of interests, e.g., economic, to another, e.g., social, political, cultural or religious.

The assumption that humans are "rational agents" in the sense that economists understand the term, which focuses exclusively on economic interest, is not a truism as supposed. The evidence shows this.

Ars Technica
The science behind human irrationality just passed a huge test
Cathleen O'Grady


Fuzzy logic and fuzzy sets  address this issue.

Statistical Modeling, Causal Inference, and Social Science
“Banishing ‘Black/White Thinking’: A Trio of Teaching Tricks”
Andrew Gelman | Professor of Statistics and Political Science and Director of the Applied Statistics Center, Columbia University

See also

Evidence for Tribalism in Economics
Blair Fix /


lastgreek said...

People are just cucks…

jenbo @irockgnomes ·13h

every single person in the united states is a cuck because come november either trump or biden will be president and we let it happen

(via Mark Ames @MarkAmesExiled)

Calgacus said...

BTW, Wray has a new book out, A Great Leap Forward: Heterodox Economic Policy for the 21st Century. Haven't seen anything on it here. Just saying.

Andrew Anderson said...

Actually, it's irrational for people who think they are mere bags of chemicals to think that people who think otherwise should heed their idea of "rationality" or even care that they don't since what's the point in a meaningless world?

Andrew Anderson said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Andrew Anderson said...

Also, my understanding is that the Scientific Method itself has its roots in the Bible. This Phd in Astrophysics, Hugh Ross, might be able to further enlighten you.

Peter Pan said...

Rigged elections as cuckoldry?

Matt Franko said...

“ the Scientific Method itself has its roots in the Bible.”

Then why do you keep advocating for the failed approach identified in the Bible?

Andrew Anderson said...

I advocate for justice, Franko, and the ENTIRE Word of God has been my guide.

As for you, you support a system that steals from and oppresses the poor and yet somehow think that Christ will give you a pass on that?

And what will your excuse be when the New Testament itself commends the Old Testament:

All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work. 2 Timothy 3:16-17

Matt Franko said...

“ for correction”

Where is your correction?

Matt Franko said...

Simple rote memorization and application of rules of behavior and conduct requires no correction or application of judgement...

Calgacus said...

AA: the ENTIRE Word of God has been my guide

Except for the parts you don't like. Think Christ will give you a pass on that?

Jesus, like the other nice Jewish boy who half the world took as the messiah, was a basically good and very smart guy. Both well worth pondering and usually hearkening to.

Generally speaking, those who like to ignore the first's thought said are called/ call themselves "Christians", those who ignore the second, "Marxists". :-)