POLSCI 331 Lecture Notes - Lecture 21: Rational Irrationality, Rational Ignorance, Instrumental And Value Rationality
4 May 2018
School
Department
Course
Professor
PHIL 11.19 Lecture Notes
Epistemic rationality v. instrumental rationality
o Epistemic = the truth
o Instrumental = to maximize utility
o Ideally, we want scientists to eliminate biases when doing research
o What about publishing research?
o What we research about is driven by our practical concerns
o Instrumental rationality drives our epistemic rationality and vice versa
o Most beliefs in the world will be biased to trying to acquire true beliefs which are more
beneficial to survive and reproduce
o Evolutionary accounts to believe in certain religions
▪ An adaptation – helps group solidarity, identity in-group and out-group
▪ Evolution may systematically give you misleading beliefs
▪ Pattern-seeking human beings – may lead us to find misleading beliefs
o Most of the time, to maximize utility, it will come about with true beliefs
Rational ignorance v. rational irrationality
o Rational ignorance – choosing not to be informed of information because cost > benefits of
information
o Rational irrationality – choosing to be irrational for instrumental purposes
▪ Instrumentally rational to be epistemically irrational
▪ Ex: religion, politics, and sports
▪ Expressive rationality – voting for a party, wearing the team sports jersey
o Ex: Referees get paid to make correct calls
▪ Voting for the team and rooting against the referees
▪ Biased way
▪ Always the referees team (even if you are epistemically wrong)
o Ex: Religion
▪ Rationally avoid any evidence that may be a counterexample to your religion or
political beliefs
▪ Religions structure your life
▪ Promise: eternal life and prosperity anticipated benefit that will encourage
people, psychologically benefit people
o Ex: Politics
▪ Inheriting political party from parents <- cognitive evidence? No
▪ You have true beliefs will not affect a political outcome
▪ Changing your beliefs will incur a big cost (be disowned by parents, community,
etc.)
Political disagreement – widespread, strong, and persistent
Contrast this to scientific disagreement what’s the distance from A to B? – no one cares to
disagree
o Anomaly’s hypothesis: scientific issues that we get really riled up about have to do with
political issues and perceived religious implications
o Ex: Climate change
▪ One country unilaterally acting will not work and might even make things worse
(industries move to China)
▪ Okay, then global cooperation
▪ Politically charged because the costs are very large
▪ Bernie Sanders (climate change will destroy everyone within a generation) v. Ted
Cruz climate change doesn’t exist
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com
Document Summary
Instrumentally rational to be epistemically irrational: ex: referees get paid to make correct calls information. No: you have true beliefs will not affect a political outcome, changing your beliefs will incur a big cost (be disowned by parents, community, Political disagreement widespread, strong, and persistent. Creationism or evolution: research that is executed after a desired politically-charged conclusion is the goal, ignore stuff that is not consistent with preexisting beliefs. Strong and persistent disagreements persist, but we would move on. Ignorance & miscalculations/cognitive errors if they were just miscalculations, we wouldn"t. Conclusion there is no general duty to vote uphold your promise, etc. ) Under some particular cases, there is a duty to vote (you promise someone and you have a duty to: derivative duty, not an intrinsic duty. Act consequentialist analysis: probability is the same, but the utility functions include all people and maybe people in other countries stakes are high, we have to do these things, 1.
