Oct. 27, 1999
Contact: David Grebe
Information Specialist
(573) 882-3346
[email protected]
MU PHILOSOPHER SEARCHES FOR MEANING OF EVERYDAY DECISIONS
COLUMBIA, Mo. -- "Why are you wearing that?" can be more than a rude comment. It's also an important philosophical query. While most of us think of philosophers as people who ponder the meaning of life, philosophy professor Paul Weirich probes for the meaning behind our everyday decisions.
Aristotle, among others, sought meaning behind what are seemingly the most banal actions of day-to-day life, such as deciding what to wear. Today, with the use of probability theory, we can find more answers to these questions. "When Aristotle thought of practical reasoning, he thought of a belief and a desire working behind every action," Weirich said. Weirich studies decision theory, a newer version of Aristotle's approach. Today, philosophers can make use of probability theory and other advances.
This approach touches on several other fields. Rational decision making is a basic element in economics. Psychologists study irrational decision making. Marketers and businessmen would certainly like to know what motivates people's daily choices. The difference between their approach and the philosopher's is that philosophers aren't looking for practical applications of their theories. Other sciences study how people do make simple decisions; philosophers prefer to look at how they should make decisions.
Most people, Weirich said, make rational decisions on a daily basis. However, there are some exceptions. "People don't take significant account of probability. Lottery tickets have such a low probability of winning that it isn't worth it," he said. Needless to say, some of us are still drawn to this behavior.
Understanding the basis for everyday decisions can be important in how we relate to others. Weirich gives us an example, and then asks two questions:
You know that someone is politically active.
Question 1: What is the likelihood she's a bank teller?
Question 2: What is the likelihood she's a feminist bank teller?
Weirich notes that many people pick question No. 2 as more likely than question No. 1, even though it's not possible to know which is more likely from the information provided. Such decisions, he notes, are the result of stereotyping. Stereotyping, despite its negative social consequences, is something everyone does. It is simply too difficult to analyze every person and situation you encounter starting from scratch, so humans will make assumptions about objects and people.
While stereotypes are convenient -- and in some cases essential -- fallacious thinking can have serious problems. However, we often don't think about them, or other factors behind our thinking, when we make the simplest decisions.
Weirich uses complicated models to analyze how people judge everyday situations ideally, and is breaking new theoretical ground by synthesizing decision theory and game theory in new ways. (Game theory is different from decision theory in that it involves more than one person acting.) Weirich's most recent book, Equilibrium and Rationality, makes an impressive, if complex, argument for refashioning decision principles that guide a great deal of philosophical analysis.
-30-
RSS