Here's another way of phrasing my point. I expect to be able to find an ecologically intuitive example, for any given "non-intuitive" probability problem, where

Here's another way of phrasing my point. I expect to be able to find an ecologically intuitive example, for any given "non-intuitive" probability problem, where the underlying reasoning/model/etc. is the same, and people will solve it exactly correctly. Try this: You're at a dinner with two others and you know the host has poisoned the food for you and your friend. He let's you choose your plate first. He then hands another plate to your friend. Do you swap your plate with the one on the table? I think in this case it "feels" more obvious that the plate on the table, being his, is much less likely to be poisoned since he will necessarily have given a poisoned one to your friend. This makes the necessity in the hosts action more intuitive. I think a lot of people here would swap, even if they couldnt fully explain why.. they know the hosts knows something and this affects what you took and what they were given. I'm sure a much better example could be created which is even more obvious.