Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Practical rationality, on the other hand, aims at non-epistemic goals, like moral, prudential, political, economic, or aesthetic goals. This is usually understood in the sense that rationality follows these goals but does not set them. So rationality may be understood as a "minister without portfolio" since it serves goals external to itself. [1]
Stanovich proposed two concepts related to dysrationalia: mindware gap and contaminated mindware. [10]A mindware gap results from gaps in education and experience. This idea focuses on the lack or limitations within a person's knowledge in logic, probability theory, or scientific method when it comes to belief orientation or decision-making.
Bounded rationality is the idea that rationality is limited when individuals make decisions, and under these limitations, ...
Gerd Gigerenzer has criticized the framing of cognitive biases as errors in judgment, and favors interpreting them as arising from rational deviations from logical thought. [ 6 ] Explanations include information-processing rules (i.e., mental shortcuts), called heuristics , that the brain uses to produce decisions or judgments.
Other cognitive biases are a "by-product" of human processing limitations, [1] resulting from a lack of appropriate mental mechanisms (bounded rationality), the impact of an individual's constitution and biological state (see embodied cognition), or simply from a limited capacity for information processing.
Rational irrationality is not doublethink and does not state that the individual deliberately chooses to believe something he or she knows to be false. Rather, the theory is that when the costs of having erroneous beliefs are low, people relax their intellectual standards and allow themselves to be more easily influenced by fallacious reasoning, cognitive biases, and emotional appeals.
[1] [2] The concept of irrationality is especially important in Albert Ellis's rational emotive behavior therapy, where it is characterized specifically as the tendency and leaning that humans have to act, emote and think in ways that are inflexible, unrealistic, absolutist and most importantly self-defeating and socially defeating and destructive.
Unlike the unbounded rationality assumed in rational choice theory, in which conclusions are reached based upon all necessary relevant information being available for consideration, the realistic limitations of most decision-making scenarios force human beings to search for data, a process that requires time, effort, and other resources that ...