Rational agent. Self Interest.

[Kuciwalker]

Any decision by the brain is the result of analysis, if just of immediate sensory perception. Duh!

[Ted Striker]

Rational agent. Self interest. Hitting it.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker


Any decision by the brain is the result of analysis, if just of immediate sensory perception. Duh!

I don't know why you believe that.

[Kidlicious]

I think I discovered the disconnect here. The Right thinks that analysis is simply impulses to the brain. I'm afraid it's much more than that.

[BeBMan]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
That's a completely meaningless statement.

Impulses traveled to his brain, as opposed to stopping at some point midway and simply causing a reflexive action. His brain, his seat of conciousness, made a decision. The thought processes - however brief - that led to the decision are the analysis. Even if it was just "oh ****, that car's coming strait at me" and he jumps aside.

Do animals also have such a "thought process" or "analysis"?

[Skanky Burns]

Ok, I'll bite.

What constitutes an analysis, according to Kidicious?

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by BeBro
Do animals also have such a "thought process" or "analysis"?

I would assume so... I mean, how else does your dog decide to chew on your shoes?

[Skanky Burns]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

economists don't assume that people always behave rationally. They only say that we can expect people to generally behave rationally

They say both. Economists do say that generally people behave rationally. But PA is also correct, economists, in creating their models and theories, assume that people always behave rationally. It's an assumption that must be made in order for any kind of model to be created.

To say otherwise means you were snoring through your classes.

Any individual may behave in an unpredictable way. But the unpredictable actions of numerous individuals tend to cancel one another out, so the average behaviour of a group is rational.

[BeBMan]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
I would assume so... I mean, how else does your dog decide to chew on your shoes?

So the dog makes a cost/benefit analysis before doing everything?

[Skanky Burns]

As opposed to...?

[Agathon]

I still would like an answer.

Which do you prefer out of these two scenarios?

(1) Your preference is satisified, but you believe it isn't.

or

(2) Your preference is not satisfied, but you believe it is.

If someone can reasonably hold that (1) is generally preferable to (2) then it cannot be the case that one's interests are selfish, since I forgo any benefit I would gain by knowing that my preference is satisfied in favour of its actual satisfaction.

[BeBMan]

Originally posted by Skanky Burns
As opposed to...?

Well, that's what I'm asking, and all I got so far is new questions

[Skanky Burns]

In the absence of any alternative, I would then have to say yes.

[BeBMan]

Then dogs make always rational decisions as we human do (always -as you think)?

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
That's a completely meaningless statement.

Impulses traveled to his brain, as opposed to stopping at some point midway and simply causing a reflexive action. His brain, his seat of conciousness, made a decision. The thought processes - however brief - that led to the decision are the analysis. Even if it was just "oh ****, that car's coming strait at me" and he jumps aside.

Clearly, you have not been introduced to the concept of "reflexes."