Rationality: What It Is, Why It Seems Scarce, Why It Matters

by Steven Pinker

“Finders keepers, losers weepers.”

I’ll call the fourth axiom Consolidation.7 Life doesn’t just present us with lotteries; it presents us with lotteries whose prizes may themselves be lotteries.

The cat that sits down on a hot stove-lid . . . will never sit down on a hot stove-lid again, and that is well; but also she will never sit down on a cold one any more. —Mark Twain1

There is a more rational way to reconcile our ignorance with our desires: the tool of reason called Signal Detection Theory or statistical decision theory. It combines the big ideas of the two preceding chapters: estimating the probability that something is true of the world (Bayesian reasoning) and deciding what to do about it by weighing its expected costs and benefits (rational choice).2

Your corn is ripe today; mine will be so tomorrow. ’Tis profitable for us both, that I should labour with you today, and that you should aid me tomorrow. I have no kindness for you, and know you have as little for me. I will not, therefore, take any pains upon your account; and should I labour with you upon my own account, in expectation of a return, I know I should be disappointed, and that I should in vain depend upon your gratitude. Here then I leave you to labour alone: You treat me in the same manner. The seasons change; and both of us lose our harvests for want of mutual confidence and security. —David Hume1

The logic of Prisoner’s Dilemmas and Public Goods undermines anarchism and radical libertarianism, despite the eternal appeal of unfettered freedom. The logic makes it rational to say, “There ought to be a law against what I’m doing.” As Thomas Hobbes put it, the fundamental principle of society is “that a man be willing, when others are so too . . . to lay down this right to all things; and be contented with so much liberty against other men, as he would allow other men against himself.”22 This social contract does not just embody the moral logic of impartiality. It also removes wicked temptations, sucker’s payoffs, and tragedies of mutual defection.

One of the first things taught in introductory statistics textbooks is that correlation is not causation. It is also one of the first things forgotten. —Thomas Sowell1

It’s not surprising that the Enlightenment-inspired theorists of American democracy were fanboys of science, nor that real and wannabe autocrats latch onto harebrained theories of cause and effect.2 Mao Zedong forced Chinese farmers to crowd their seedlings together to enhance their socialist solidarity,

recent American leader suggested that Covid-19 could be treated with injections of bleach.

Trump didnt say anything like that your extreme bias towards him and his vıters made this book extremely cringe. Why are you constantly pandering to the left who hates your guts and canceled you meanwhile we on the right care to read your books.

Times op-ed argued for abolishing the police because “the current approach hasn’t ended [rape]. Most rapists never see the inside of a courtroom.”17 The editorialist did not consider whether, if there were no police, even fewer rapists, or none at all, would see the inside of a courtroom.

panacea

The other problem with experimental manipulations, of course, is that the world is not a laboratory. It’s not as if political scientists can flip a coin, impose democracy on some countries and autocracy on others, and wait five years to see which ones go to war. The same practical and ethical problems apply to studies of individuals, as shown in this cartoon.

What causes major depression, a stressful event or a genetic predisposition? This graph plots the likelihood of suffering a major depressive episode in a sample of women with twin sisters.33

Knowing the difference between main effects and interactions not only protects us from falling for false dichotomies but offers us deeper insight into the nature of the underlying causes. Adapted with permission from Vaci, Edelsbrunner, et al., 2019

Tell people there’s an invisible man in the sky who created the universe, and the vast majority will believe you. Tell them the paint is wet, and they have to touch it to be sure. —George Carlin

At the time of this writing, a glorious milestone in the history of rationality is coming into view: vaccines likely to end a deadly plague are being administered less than a year after the plague emerged.

They did not. Now covid vaccine companies are being sued.

Finally, we must go beyond offhand excuses that just attribute one irrationality to another. It’s never a good explanation to say that people embrace some false belief because it gives them comfort or helps them make sense of the world, because that only raises the question of why people should get comfort and closure from beliefs that could not possibly do them any good.

As shown in Pinkers faith in democrats. Every chapter in the book there was a remark belittling Trump and his voters while he almost completely believes every damn false attribute made against him. This makes pinker feel good about his position since he doesnt question what IF these things attributed to Trump and his voters are also false...

Thankfully, Western religious belief is safely parked in the mythology zone, where many people are protective of its sovereignty. In the mid-aughts, the “New Atheists,” Sam Harris, Daniel Dennett, Christopher Hitchens, and Richard Dawkins, became targets of vituperation not just from Bible-thumping evangelists but also from mainstream intellectuals.

Meanwhile islam and judaism gets a full free pass along with a ton of new age faith systems originating from the left. Noted.