You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Demonstrated Preference, Socialism, and Steemit
Your definition of "rational" assumes value is objective. But value is subjective, and any choice I make is rational because it's my preference.
Your definition of "rational" assumes value is objective. But value is subjective, and any choice I make is rational because it's my preference.
Your subjective perceptions are filtered to a chain of reasoning that may be rational or irrational to arrive at a choice. Whether the choice is rational or not depends upon how you reasoned from your perceptions.
By your definition nothing is ever irrational.
You're using "rational" in a different way than @Geke. You're talking about judging whether an action is rational ex post facto; Geke is talking about the process of selecting multiple available means for the attainment of some subjectively preferred ends being a rational process in and of itself. Whether or not the means chosen result in ends intended does not change the fact that the process by which the means were chosen was itself rational.
This is not to say that people don't hold irrational beliefs or that their irrational beliefs don't affect the rational process of choosing means in the attainment of some preferred ends.
Exactly, and yes @dantheman, according to my definition, people never act irrationally. Which was my original point in response to @freewill. People almost never act irrationally because they always act in their own self-perceived best interest. (Almost always, with a few weird exceptions.)