Furthermore, if we cannot trust someone to make a big judgment, such as which option is best, why would we trust all of the little judgments that go into the rational choice strategy?
Argument against using a more comprehensive and rigorous "rational" decision. I wonder what this insight means for e.g. promotion and hire evaluations. Does it mean that novices using rigorous methods should not be trusted more than they should be trusted with non-rigorous methods. I've seen some support for that in my experience where people don't k now how to interpret the large amount of small datapoints or if there is a formulaic aggregate formed from the small datapoints then they are not able to notice when the results don't make sense or when some parts of the result should be discounted or emphasozed.
