Comment on Taboo "rationality," please.

Mon, 16 Mar 2009 12:31:20 GMT

Yes, actually, I had the same thought myself last night and was about to edit.

Now, as a matter of fact it does seem likely to me that the turnaround was between 1950 and today. This does seem like a "too good to be true" coincidence... suggesting the alternative hypothesis that I am busy rationalizing.

But I've reviewed the object-level arguments, and they seem solid.

I think that the explanation for half of the co-incidence is that science is a common cause of rationality arts and the improved standard of living that makes them worth applying. JulianMorrison simultaneously made the same suggestion.

The other half of the co-incidence (why aren't we alive waaaaay after it becomes rational to be rational) is actually not such a co-incidence... there is nothing interesting to be learned by observing that we're alive just after technology becomes quite an important factor. (other than the usual doomsday argument/negative singularity stuff which we won't go into)

EDIT: the possibility that we are rationalizing should cause us to decrease our confidence somewhat in the position stated above. Though, the fact that JulianMorrison thought of the same explanation independently of me should be noted. We should now consider more seriously the alternative hypothesis that "perfect rationality" is still not optimal, and that deliberately deluding ourselves in some significant part of our lives is a good idea. [I stand by my position that there were definitely some periods where rationality was a real downer]. Thanks to gjm and johnicholas for pointing this out.

Discuss