On Jan 25, 2010, at 10:59 PM, David B. Shemano wrote:
Michael Perelman writes:
Here is where we disagree: you write:
In conclusion, I repeat that
"cost/benefit analysis is inherently/inseparable part of decision-
making"
I know you want to end this, but please give me an example of
rational decision-making that does not include cost/benefit analysis
at the heart of the decision-making. Even if you are not a
utilitarian, how can you entirely ignore the costs and benefits of a
decision? At minimum, you need to come up with a pretty good reason
for choosing alternative X as opposed to Y when you believe the
relative benefits versus costs of Y are preferable to X. Please be
concrete.
Rational human decision making is based on knowledge of the
unquantifiability
of the probability distribution and utility values of the range of
possible outcomes. Cost-benefit analysis is nothing if not
quantitative (C>,=, or<B). Cost-benefit analysis is therefore not
merely inconsistent, but incompatible with rational decision making.
Shane Mage
This cosmos did none of gods or men make, but it
always was and is and shall be: an everlasting fire,
kindling in measures and going out in measures."
Herakleitos of Ephesos
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
