I will continue to pick at nits here and suggest that there may be a
relative (and more importantly, uncertain) autonomy between everyday
rationality and formal rationality as Oaksford Chater discuss in
Bayesian Rationality (2007). This limits but does not negate the
effectiveness of
On 8/7/07, ken hanly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes. It is assumed that each player knows the payoff
to each player for each of the four possible
combination of choices. It is also assumed that the
players are both rational in that they want to
minimize their time spent in jail. There is no
ken hanly wrote:
It is not that some definition of rational is contradictory it is
that the traditional solution of the dilemma is not rational according
to the standard definition because it does not lead to the least time
served for the players.
if you are an individualistic prisoner (thinking
I like to point out the difference between rationality and selfishness, which
is more often than not conflated in most economic discussions. It is possible
to be rational and nonselfish.
ken hanly wrote:
It is not that some definition of rational is contradictory it is
that the traditional
On 8/7/07, Gassler Robert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I like to point out the difference between rationality and selfishness, which
is more often than not conflated in most economic discussions. It is possible
to be rational and nonselfish.
to economists, as far as I can tell, rationality
Isn't rationality far more limited than you suggest? Isn't it rational to cut
down
forests or to destroy the ocean if the present value of the expected benefits
exceeds
the present value of the expected costs?
On Tue, Aug 07, 2007 at 08:35:58AM -0700, Jim Devine wrote:
On 8/7/07, Gassler
I had written:
to economists, as far as I can tell, rationality simply means
consistency. But I used the word individualistic. That's another
word that's ambiguous without definition, but I meant greedy.
Michael Perelman wrote:
Isn't rationality far more limited than you suggest? Isn't
Michael Perelman wrote:
Isn't rationality far more limited than you suggest? Isn't it
rational to cut down
forests or to destroy the ocean if the present value of the
expected benefits exceeds
the present value of the expected costs?
Economic Rationality thus defined is, in practice,
Yes. It is assumed that each player knows the payoff
to each player for each of the four possible
combination of choices. It is also assumed that the
players are both rational in that they want to
minimize their time spent in jail. There is no need to
communicate with the other person.
There is
The Game
Tucker began with a little story, like this: two
burglars, Bob and Al, are captured near the scene of a
burglary and are given the third degree separately
by the police. Each has to choose whether or not to
confess and implicate the other. If neither man
confesses, then both will serve
10 matches
Mail list logo
