Are humans rational
The human species has well developed cognitive abilities compared to animals. These can be remarkable like language and many other communication systems. Our visual system provides us with excellent vital information for the environment. Besides, through thinking and problem solving, we have adapted the environment to suit us and developed science and technology. Surely, these are evidence of an advanced intelligence humans possess. On the other hand, though, psychological research strongly suggests that humans are irrational. There is a mass of psychological evidence (Kahneman et al., 1982; Baron, 1988; Evans et al., 1993), which show many errors and biases in human reasoning and decision-making. Besides, everyday life provides us with supportive evidence for human irrationality. Smoking and drink driving is just a couple of them. How did humans achieve so much but are being irrational in so many experimental tasks and many aspects of life? Philosophers and psychologists, troubled by this paradox, suggest that there must either be something wrong with the experimental research as it is or researchers misinterpret the findings.In 1996, Evans and Over proposed another possible solution to the
· Evans, J.St B.T., Newstead, S.E. and Byrne, R.M.J. (1993). Human reasoning: The psychology of Deduction. Erlbaum. Both uses of rationality are limited and research focuses on errors and biases in thinking, suggesting that humans are irrational. At the same time, human intelligence has successfully evolved to the point of trying to make computers think like humans. Humans can be rational and irrational through their lives. Humans make good decisions, as well as bad ones, everyday. Any limitations in our reasoning could be reduced with training on following the rules of logic. Thus, taking in mind we have highly adaptive intelligence, our ability to reason could improve. · Ormerod, T.C. (1997). Rationalities 1 and 2: dual processes or different task demands? Current Psychology of Cognition, 16, 181-189. In real life, people do not always use logic and probability theories to make a decision. Past experience and individual factors are more likely to influence everyday decision-making. A rational decision would be based on hypothetical thinking and should be made after all the alternative actions are assessed and the most profitable one is chosen. If logic were applied to everyday issues such as smoking, decision-making would be much harder. For example, would it be irrational for a soldier in war to smoke? His health is in great risk already so why worry for long-term implications of smoking? Smokers admit that smoking is irrational but benefits (such as conformity and stress relief) should be taken into account when trying to judge based on logic. Besides, decision-making is subjective and no theory argues that long-term goals are superior to short-term ones (e.g. being healthy). Humans are not likely to act based on hypothetical analysis of future events but to try to achieve immediate goals using past references. · Evans, J. & Over, D. (1997) Are people rational? Yes, no and sometimes. Psychologist. 1997 Sep; Vol. 10(9): 403-406. When a normative question like 'Are we
Some common words found in the essay are:
Kahneman Tversky, , Taylor Brown, Chater Nick, Nisbett Borgida, Brain Sciences, HR Ayton, Bulletin Sep, Ormerod TC, Theory Psychology, et al, people suffering, hypothetical thinking, past references, humans rational, reasoning result, cambridge university press, human reasoning, errors biases, evans et, evans et al, thinking reasoning, routledge london ·, 'belief bias' effect, supportive evidence human,
Approximate Word count = 1344
Approximate Pages = 5 (250 words per page double spaced)
|
