The author is the one "peddling" the idea that loss aversion is a phalacy but at least he seems to (ironically) recognize that his argument is in itself part of

The author is the one "peddling" the idea that loss aversion is a phalacy but at least he seems to (ironically) recognize that his argument is in itself part of the social/argumentative part of science. Even so, this article seems to draw conclusions as if they were widely held beliefs (I'm not qualified to speak to these claims until I do my own research).