|
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Okay COR, I have a quandry
| quote: | Originally posted by Lira
Welcome to the club 
Interesting post, and I agree with you that probably there's something innate that leads us to adopt the "tit-for-tat" model quite naturally. I'm just quite wary of claiming something is innate, specially when it's not within my field of expertise 
Maybe you should read Hauser's book then, it seems like he agrees with you and takes the discussion a few steps further. |
I know, i wanted to read Mark Hauser for quite some time now but unfortunately i can't find the time for it. Thanks for reminding me though!
I also think that in situations such as System-J's in which one has to take some decisions, psychological decision-making models such as the ones proposed by Tversky and Kahneman (leading to the Nobel of economics in the 70s although their extensive experimental work was extending far-beyond economic decisions) have a lot to say. For example anticipated regret can produce "omission bias" in which people prefer inaction over action, and this is higher when the anticipated regret is also perceived as higher than usual. Hence, in this situation in which System-J's object had little relation to his well-being and the anticipated regret was perceived as related to some small moral cheat, action was prefered. In some more serious situations though in which regret would be perceived as devastating for one-self, inaction would be prefered. Also very important is the "perceived justification" bias as well (take an action only when it is justified by something regardless of the fact that even if its not justified it can result in the exact same outcome) This are just some of the biases that Tversky and Kahneman found in their judgement and decision-making studies but there are many more, its just the ones i remembered lol.
|