3 ms·

Problem is, few people are actually like this. Behavioral economics have demonstrated that humans are vulnerable to hyperbolic discounting, which is irrational.

Problem is, few people are actually like this. Behavioral economics have demonstrated that humans are vulnerable to hyperbolic discounting, which is irrational. Because what I want for myself now is different from what I want for myself next week. Telling people who are vulnerable to this to stay indoors is roughly the same as telling everyone to stay indoors. Personally, I think the initial question is ill formed. It would be like asking, "do tall people exist?" Although now that I read the article, what the author is really answering is the question of whether rationality along different tests is correlated. That is, is there a common underlying variable. How fascinating.

spacehome 12y ago
I'm not sure hyperbolic discounting is all that irrational. Example from Wikipedia illustrating hyperbolic discounting: "For instance: "Would you prefer a dollar today or three dollars tomorrow?" or "Would you prefer a dollar in one year or three dollars in one year and one day?" For certain range of offerings, a significant fraction of subjects will take the lesser amount today, but will gladly wait one extra day in a year in order to receive the higher amount instead." To me, the biggest risk is the counterparty risk that you'll never see the other person again. I myself would take $1 today from someone I've never met over $3 tomorrow, because I'm quite skeptical they'd even show up. Of course, the chance a person shows back up 365 vs. 366 days from now is pretty much identical, so I'd take the $3.
- ansible 12y ago
  I agree with your thoughts on hyperbolic discounting. Maybe I'll be dead next year. Maybe I just don't trust you. Probabilistic reasoning is a tricky business. Also, I can reason about the likelihood that the store is going to have a loaf of bread tomorrow because we have experience dealing with that every day. The kind of scenarios concocted by economists are quite odd. Rarely is a stranger just giving you money with no strings attached.

spacehome 12y ago

I'm not sure hyperbolic discounting is all that irrational. Example from Wikipedia illustrating hyperbolic discounting: "For instance: "Would you prefer a dollar today or three dollars tomorrow?" or "Would you prefer a dollar in one year or three dollars in one year and one day?" For certain range of offerings, a significant fraction of subjects will take the lesser amount today, but will gladly wait one extra day in a year in order to receive the higher amount instead." To me, the biggest risk is the counterparty risk that you'll never see the other person again. I myself would take $1 today from someone I've never met over $3 tomorrow, because I'm quite skeptical they'd even show up. Of course, the chance a person shows back up 365 vs. 366 days from now is pretty much identical, so I'd take the $3.

ansible 12y ago
I agree with your thoughts on hyperbolic discounting. Maybe I'll be dead next year. Maybe I just don't trust you. Probabilistic reasoning is a tricky business. Also, I can reason about the likelihood that the store is going to have a loaf of bread tomorrow because we have experience dealing with that every day. The kind of scenarios concocted by economists are quite odd. Rarely is a stranger just giving you money with no strings attached.