3 ms·
> mistake rationality for computer-like adherence to a set of rules I might be mistaken but I think in terms of economics that this is literally the definition
by JupiterMoon 11y ago
> mistake rationality for computer-like adherence to a set of rules
I might be mistaken but I think in terms of economics that this is literally the definition of rationality.
Your experimental example is with real people. Real people are not rational actors (as a rational actor is defined in economics). This is considered by many to be a major flaw in traditional economics.
- aakilfernandes 11y agoBy the definition I understand, rational means payoff maximizing. How an actor gets to payoff maximization is irrelevant. In other words if "irrational" actions result in payoff maximization, then the "irrational" actions ARE rational.
- danmaz74 11y ago> Real people are not rational actors (as a rational actor is defined in economics). This is considered by many to be a major flaw in traditional economics. On the flip side, this is considered by many traditional economists to be a major flaw in real people.
- aakilfernandes 11y agoSeeing as the "irrational" actor outperforms the "rational" actor, we should be happy real people are "irrational" at least some of the time.
- boxy310 11y agoThis is probably because evolution operates on a genetic systematic basis, rewarded by external outputs. Capacity for rational thought is a side effect of this process, and does not necessarily proceed from first principles like much of economics would prefer.
- JupiterMoon 11y agoI.e. classical rational economics is wrong -- and you provide a first principle reason why (adding to the experimental stuff I already knew about).
- JupiterMoon 11y agoI hear that people on various anti-depression drugs tend to behave more like proper rational actors. Maybe if we all agreed to take the pills economists could actually understand what is going on...