Ad
related to: rational ignorance vs rational irrationality
Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
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.
Marketers can take advantage of rational ignorance by increasing the complexity of a decision. If the difference in value between a quality product and a poor product is less than the cost to perform the research necessary to differentiate between them, then it is more rational for a consumer to just take his chances on whichever of the two is more convenient and available.
Tactical irrationality gives rationally fought terrorism its strong effect. Beyond tactics, terrorism can even be understood as strategic irrationality. Furthermore, strategic irrationalism is an important basis for the development and exploitation of niches in the esoteric market as well as by sectarian religious communities.
[1] [2] The concept of irrationality is especially important in Albert Ellis's rational emotive behavior therapy, where it is characterized specifically as the tendency and leaning that humans have to act, emote and think in ways that are inflexible, unrealistic, absolutist and most importantly self-defeating and socially defeating and destructive.
Carl Jung developed the theory of cognitive processes in his book Psychological Types, in which he defined only four psychological functions, which can take introverted or extraverted attitudes, as well as a judging (rational) or perceiving (irrational) attitude determined by the primary function (judging if thinking or feeling, and perceiving ...
Such “rational ignorance” incentivizes politicians to promote harmful-but-popular policies. The danger of ignorance isn’t just that it leads voters to choose the “wrong” candidate.
The book received a mixed-to-positive review from Loren Lomasky in Public Choice, [8] co-inventor of the theory of "expressive voting" that was a close competitor to Caplan's theory of rational irrationality. [9] Stuart Farrand wrote a critique of Caplan's book for Libertarian Papers. [10] Gene Callahan reviewed the book for The Independent ...
Rational choice institutionalism; Rational ignorance; Rational irrationality; Red tape; Regulatory capture; Regulatory economics; Rent extraction; Rent-seeking; Rent-setting; Revolving door (politics)