Conversation

Logic is real Mistakes are real Ignorance is real Observed behaviors are real Revealed preferences are real Conscious and unconscious subjective values are real But rationality/irrationality is authoritarian phlogiston. Strictly in the same category as “god”
7
82
“Biases” in behavioral economics sense are real in the sense of observable systematic tendencies in behavioral phenomenology They are applied phlogiston if subjected to interpretation as rational/irrational relative to assumed intentions
1
11
This really is the best justification for pursuing rationality, and my own when I do try to act rationally. It's just not very flattering to conceits that one is seeking "truth." Phlogiston recognized for what it is (contingent ontology) is great.
Quote Tweet
Replying to @vgr
"But wait, phlogiston theory led to experiments which ultimately concluded with the discovery of oxygen. So too, rationality/irrationality may be functional and useful you see?" - some guy
Replying to
Back when I wrote Tempo 10 years ago, I pulled my punches in framing narrative rationality softly around this view. Now I'm kinda willing to be blunt about it.
1
6
This thread a sequel to this one
Quote Tweet
Chesterton-Miller Behavioral Fence: when you see people behaving in a seemingly suboptimal way, ask what you’re missing about what they’re actually optimizing for. Behavior is rarely suboptimal, but assumed cost functions are usually wrong.
Show this thread
1
8
I used to be more moderate. For eg. I thought individual subjective consistency across time is a safe basis for at least defining solipsistic rationality. But even that turns out to be too shaky. At best you get weak approximate consistency across time because people grow/change
2
9