Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Greater likelihood of recalling recent, nearby, or otherwise immediately available examples, and the imputation of importance to those examples over others. Bizarreness effect: Bizarre material is better remembered than common material. Boundary extension: Remembering the background of an image as being larger or more expansive than the ...
Some of the earlier examples may qualify as rational in the academic sense depending on the circumstances. Examples of irrationality in this sense include cognitive biases and violating the laws of probability theory when assessing the likelihood of future events. [12] This article focuses mainly on irrationality in the academic sense.
This example demonstrates how a cognitive bias, typically seen as a hindrance, can enhance collective decision-making by encouraging a wider exploration of possibilities. [ 43 ] Cognitive biases are interlinked with collective illusions, a phenomenon where a group of people mistakenly believe that their views and preferences are shared by the ...
For example, oxygen is necessary for fire. But one cannot assume that everywhere there is oxygen, there is fire. A condition X is sufficient for Y if X, by itself, is enough to bring about Y. For example, riding the bus is a sufficient mode of transportation to get to work.
However, irrationality is not always viewed as a negative. Much subject matter in literature can be seen as an expression of human longing for the irrational. The Romantics valued irrationality over what they perceived as the sterile, calculating and emotionless philosophy which they thought to have been brought about by the Age of ...
Some rationalizations take the form of a comparison. Commonly, this is done to lessen the perception of an action's negative effects, to justify an action, or to excuse culpability: "At least [what occurred] is not as bad as [a worse outcome]." In response to an accusation: "At least I didn't [worse action than accused action]."
One way of thinking holds that the mental process of decision-making is (or should be) rational: a formal process based on optimizing utility. [1] Rational thinking and decision-making does not leave much room for strong emotions. [2] In fact, emotions are often considered irrational occurrences that may distort reasoning. [3]
Rational irrationality is not doublethink and does not state that the individual deliberately chooses to believe something he or she knows to be false. Rather, the theory is that when the costs of having erroneous beliefs are low, people relax their intellectual standards and allow themselves to be more easily influenced by fallacious reasoning, cognitive biases, and emotional appeals.