Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that Binmore's critique of bounded rationality holds that rationality norms apply to the idealized game, not to cognitively crippled proxies of the original agents.

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Real agents are not 'proxies' of ideal agents—they are the primary subjects. Norms should apply where decisions actually occur.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Idealizations about infinite computation are empirically false; norms for impossible agents cannot guide real-world policy or evaluation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Bounded rationality shows agents have different cognitive architecture; rationality norms must be tailored to actual capacities, not ideals.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Game theory's explanatory power derives from idealizations about rational actors, not from modeling actual cognitive limitations.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Confusing norms for idealized agents with descriptive claims about real agents creates category errors that undermine theoretical clarity.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Bounded rationality studies should explain deviations from ideal rationality, presupposing rather than replacing the ideal standard.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.