Somebody should write an “encyclopedia of copes and rationalizations”
Copes and rationalizations are both much more interesting and I think more analytically sound mental models than “biases”
“Cognitive biases” is the most overrated idea I’ve ever encountered. Like everyone else I was impressed when I first encountered them in ~2005. Now I think they are ontologically ill-posed, not-even-wrong in terms of analytical “insights” and cancerous as normative scaffolding.
Things tagged as copes and rationalizations don’t pretend to be anything more than they are — little narrative patterns that form a folksonomy of revealing cognitive tendencies. No shady “experimental” evidence and claims of statistical significance. Just literary observations.
Not necessarily. Often all we have is copes and rationalizations, and no way to know a meaningful "ground" truth. Are "religion" and "atheism" biases about the afterlife? Both are obviously copes/rationalizations concerning mortality, but it seems silly to call them biases