Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why is it so hard to be rational?

newyorker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 309 posts

Re: Why is it so hard to be rational?

#91

Post by _greim_ »

achenatx wrote: post #27

The ultimate issue is that underpinning every action is a value system. Value systems are opinions and are fundamentally not rational. Virtually every political disagreement is based on values, though most of the time people dont recognize it. Values determine priorities and priorities underpin action. For example some people feel that liberty (e.g. choice) is more important than saving lives when it comes to vaccine…

> is a stereo that sounds better actually better than a stereo that looks better? That is a value judgement and there is no right or wrong.

Disagree; value systems are the inputs to rationality. The only constraint is that you do the introspection in order to know what it is that you value. In that sense buying a stereo based on appearance is the right decision if you seek status among peers or appreciate aesthetics. It's the wrong decision if you want sound quality or durability.

I think the real issue is that people don't do the necessary introspection, and instead just glom onto catch-phrases or follow someone else's lead. That's why so many people hold political views that are contrary to their own interests.

Re: Why is it so hard to be rational?

#92

Post by throwaway9690 »

dfxm12 wrote: post #62
throwaway9690 wrote: post #30

I think part of the problem is that most people are conditioned into many beliefs from a young age I know a guy who hates foo (using a place holder). In fact he's downright foophobic. He is pretty convinced he has a natural unbiased hate of foo and is being rational when he expresses it. To me as an outsider it is pretty obvious that his hate of foo is the result of cultural conditioning. To him it is perfectly ratio…

It really depends what foo is. I don't think it's rational to waste time on unimportant things. If foo is eating red meat, then I don't think it's rational to really worry about it one way or another. I think part of the problem is that most people are conditioned into many beliefs from a young age I think it's irrational to not consider new information when processed. So, again, this depends on what foo is. If it is…

When I mention conditioning, I mean from a very young age.

For example: Throw salt over your shoulder if you spill some -or- Green skinned people are bad and you should never trust them or allow them in your neighborhood.

Now the former is pretty harmless but not so the latter. In both cases the only explanation is "that's how I was raised" which I don't find compelling or rational.

Re: Why is it so hard to be rational?

#93

Post by throwaway9690 »

wizzwizz4 wrote: post #33
throwaway9690 wrote: post #30

I think part of the problem is that most people are conditioned into many beliefs from a young age I know a guy who hates foo (using a place holder). In fact he's downright foophobic. He is pretty convinced he has a natural unbiased hate of foo and is being rational when he expresses it. To me as an outsider it is pretty obvious that his hate of foo is the result of cultural conditioning. To him it is perfectly ratio…

Preferences do not need to be rationally justified; without axiomic preferences, we have no preferences at all.

I'm referring more to prejudices rather than preferences.

Re: Why is it so hard to be rational?

#94

Post by amanaplanacanal »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #37
nvilcins wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We all operate with abstractions and simplifications - because it's impractical (and actually impossible given the complexity of the world) to process end evaluate every single detail. Dealing with contradictions in our own beliefs (paradoxes) is a part of life. The rational approach is to accept that and "fuse" those beliefs carefully, not (a) accept one and reject the others or (b) avoid the topic entirely.

The rational approach is to acknowledge that you do not have sufficient information to proceed, or acknowledge the various assumptions (better word than “belief) that you are using. If you are using contradicting assumptions, then you should probably check to see if you are doing so because you want the conclusion that you are getting from the assumption.

We make decisions based on imperfect information and conflicting values every day. We generally can’t wait until we have sufficient information to proceed.

Re: Why is it so hard to be rational?

#96

Post by varjag »

btilly wrote: post #14

I maintain that it isn't just hard, it is computationally impossible. We should all know that given a belief about the world, and evidence, Bayes' Theorem describes how to update our beliefs. But what if we have a network of interrelated beliefs? That's called a Bayesian net, and it turns out that Bayes' Theorem also prescribes a unique answer. However, unfortunately, it turns out that working out that answer is NP-h…

Thing is the common failures of rational thinking are not approaching any computational limits. Witness the dumbassery of the past two years.

Re: Why is it so hard to be rational?

#97

Post by varjag »

btilly wrote: post #86
polote wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was no new evidence. I'm not sure we have even learned anything regarding the efficacy of masks trough the pandemic. All what we know was already known prior of it.

First, there is active research and we demonstrably have learned something. See https://aricjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s1375... , https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-72798-7 , and https://www.pnas.org/content/118/4/e2014564118 for several examples. Second, your simplistic analysis demonstrated that you, personally, are ignorant of the real tradeoffs involved in whether masks work. Wearing a mas…

…and as they mentioned, we knew that masks work already.

Re: Why is it so hard to be rational?

#98

Post by irrational »

varjag wrote: post #96
btilly wrote: post #14

I maintain that it isn't just hard, it is computationally impossible. We should all know that given a belief about the world, and evidence, Bayes' Theorem describes how to update our beliefs. But what if we have a network of interrelated beliefs? That's called a Bayesian net, and it turns out that Bayes' Theorem also prescribes a unique answer. However, unfortunately, it turns out that working out that answer is NP-h…

Thing is the common failures of rational thinking are not approaching any computational limits. Witness the dumbassery of the past two years.

Past 5-6 years you mean.

Re: Why is it so hard to be rational?

#99

Post by [deleted] »

btilly wrote: post #14

I maintain that it isn't just hard, it is computationally impossible. We should all know that given a belief about the world, and evidence, Bayes' Theorem describes how to update our beliefs. But what if we have a network of interrelated beliefs? That's called a Bayesian net, and it turns out that Bayes' Theorem also prescribes a unique answer. However, unfortunately, it turns out that working out that answer is NP-h…

[deleted]

Re: Why is it so hard to be rational?

#100

Post by Jensson »

btilly wrote: post #14

I maintain that it isn't just hard, it is computationally impossible. We should all know that given a belief about the world, and evidence, Bayes' Theorem describes how to update our beliefs. But what if we have a network of interrelated beliefs? That's called a Bayesian net, and it turns out that Bayes' Theorem also prescribes a unique answer. However, unfortunately, it turns out that working out that answer is NP-h…

Being rational includes being rational about computation power and heuristics used on a specific choice. Therefore irrational is when people make completely stupid choices that aren't computationally hard to make, not that people can't solve NP-hard problems.
Post reply on HN