http://www.overcomingbias.com/2019/05/simplerules.html … @robinhanson's explanation for why people prefer discretion to simple rules is overconfidence -- everyone assumes *they'd* be the one to have special pull with decision-makers, or wants to pretend they are. "Let's play fair" is a loser's position.
-
-
2.) Ignorance or lack of intelligence: the idea of fair, impartial rules is a bit abstract, and has to be taught, and not everybody gets taught and not everybody copes well with abstraction.
Show this thread -
(I sometimes think that if civics isn't taught in schools people will eventually grow up without actually grokking the idea of "checks on power" being a good thing *independent* of who's in power.)
Show this thread -
3.) Power. Often we have a discretionary rather than rule-based system not because *most* people like it that way, but because the *powerful* people like it that way. (as
@TheZvi also said.) It's TurboTax lobbyists, not regular people, who prevent automatic tax filing.Show this thread -
4.) Price discrimination. Often, you can get a better deal if you ask for a favor (or bargain) face to face than if you follow procedure. The average person isn't overconfidently estimating their charm: they're *correct* that askers do better than nonaskers on average.
Show this thread -
Orgs may rationally choose to allow "squeaky wheels" to get favors because they care more. So, e.g. airlines give their customer service reps leeway to offer discounts, so they can charge the price-insensitive people more than the hagglers.
Show this thread -
5.) "Copenhagen interpretation of ethics" = condemnation of intentional but not unintentional harm. This makes some sense as a legal standard, but it's crazy when you expand it to policy, as many do.
Show this thread -
Most people prefer policies with large, harmful unintended consequences over policies which explicitly admit to causing some, smaller harms. This seems like a result of confusing the question of "would this be a good world to live in?" with "should these people be punished?"
Show this thread -
6.) There's a weird thing where justice/rationality/impersonal principle is coded as "mean" while making exceptions is coded as "nice." A "judgmental" person is one who makes *harsh* judgments -- even though judgments can be good as well as bad.
Show this thread -
This may just be loss aversion or pessimistic bias: the fear of being punished for our failings is more salient than the hope of being rewarded for our merits.
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
The alternative here isn't a rule vs nothing, its a rule vs discretion. Why would one think a rule would be applied unfairly while discretion would be more fair?
-
Due to the anticipation, rational or not, of unintended consequences of applying the rule. A rule with no flexibility (including simple rules that act in a very specific way, but over a broad range of issues) is seen as a risk.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.