Rationality

About: Rationality is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 20459 publications have been published within this topic receiving 617787 citations.

Made to Measure: Ecological Rationality in Structured Environments

Abstract: A working assumption that processes of natural and cultural evolution have tailored the mind to fit the demands and structure of its environment begs the question: how are we to characterize the structure of cognitive environments? Decision problems faced by real organisms are not like simple multiple-choice examination papers. For example, some individual problems may occur much more frequently than others, whilst some may carry much more weight than others. Such considerations are not taken into account when (i) the performance of candidate cognitive mechanisms is assessed by employing a simple accuracy metric that is insensitive to the structure of the decision-maker's environment, and (ii) reason is defined as the adherence to internalist prescriptions of classical rationality. Here we explore the impact of frequency and significance structure on the performance of a range of candidate decision-making mechanisms. We show that the character of this impact is complex, since structured environments demand that decision-makers trade off general performance against performance on important subsets of test items. As a result, environment structure obviates internalist criteria of rationality. Failing to appreciate the role of environment structure in shaping cognition can lead to mischaracterising adaptive behavior as irrational.

As-if behavioral economics : Neoclassical economics in disguise?

Abstract: For a research program that counts improved empirical realism among its primary goals, it is surprising that behavioral economics appears indistinguishable from neoclassical economics in its reliance on “as-if” arguments “As-if” arguments are frequently put forward in behavioral economics to justify “psychological” models that add new parameters to fit decision outcome data rather than specifying more realistic or empirically supported psychological processes that genuinely explain these data Another striking similarity is that both behavioral and neoclassical research programs refer to a common set of axiomatic norms without subjecting them to empirical investigation Notably missing is investigation of whether people who deviate from axiomatic rationality face economically significant losses Despite producing prolific documentation of deviations from neoclassical norms, behavioral economics has produced almost no evidence that deviations are correlated with lower earnings, lower happiness, impaired health, inaccurate beliefs, or shorter lives We argue for an alternative non-axiomatic approach to normative analysis focused on veridical descriptions of decision process and a matching principle – between behavioral strategies and the environments in which they are used – referred to as ecological rationality To make behavioral economics, or psychology and economics, a more rigorously empirical science will require less effort spent extending “as-if” utility theory to account for biases and deviations, and substantially more careful observation of successful decision makers in their respective domains

Medicine, Rationality, and Experience.

Abstract: Medicine, Rationality, and Experience. Byron J. Good. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1994(cloth and paper). xvii. 242 pp.

An intricate fabric: understanding the rationality of practice

Abstract: This article provides an account of a ‘neo-Aristotelian’ conception of practice. It introduces this account through an analysis of internal and external goods of practices. It then delineates a crucial distinction between practical and technical rationality and grounds this distinction in an analysis of the priority of ‘material’ over ‘method’ in different domains of activity. It concludes by addressing some possible misgivings about the account and by tracing some of its most significant implications for the relationship of theory and practice.

Beyond the Limits of Technocratic Physical Education

Abstract: As part of their quest to secure academic credibility, physical educators in Australia, Canada, Britain, and the United States have increasingly privileged empirical–analytical forms of research. We argue that this strategy has resulted in a montage of professional values and practices that we term technocratic physical education (TPE). We contend that TPE is based on ideologies of professionalism, scientism, and instrumental rationality, which articulate one-dimensional definitions of excellence in teaching, the body, and sport and also marginalize issues related to political and moral ends. By drawing on the traditions of critical pedagogy and reflective teaching, we suggest some ways in which the limits of TPE can be transcended in pre- and inservice teacher education curricula.