Difference between revisions of "Rationalization"

From Lesswrongwiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(Other posts)
(Primary posts)
Line 12: Line 12:
 
*[http://lesswrong.com/lw/jt/what_evidence_filtered_evidence/ What Evidence Filtered Evidence?]
 
*[http://lesswrong.com/lw/jt/what_evidence_filtered_evidence/ What Evidence Filtered Evidence?]
 
*[http://lesswrong.com/lw/ju/rationalization/ Rationalization]
 
*[http://lesswrong.com/lw/ju/rationalization/ Rationalization]
 +
*[http://lesswrong.com/lw/jw/a_rational_argument/ A Rational Argument]
  
 
==Other posts==
 
==Other posts==

Revision as of 15:16, 7 August 2011

A curious term for the very opposite and antithesis of rationality, as if lying were called "truthization". You cannot "rationalize" what is not already rational.

Rationality starts from evidence, and then crunches forward through belief updates, in order to output a probable conclusion. "Rationalization" starts from a conclusion, and then works backward to arrive at arguments apparently favoring that conclusion. Rationalization argues for a side already selected; rationality tries to choose between sides.

Rationalization can be conscious or unconscious. It can take on a blatant, conscious form, in which you are aware that you want a particular side to be correct and you deliberately compose arguments for only that side, looking over the evidence and consciously filtering which facts will be presented. Or it can occur at perceptual speeds, without conscious intent or conscious awareness.

Defeating rationalization - or even discovering rationalizations - is a lifelong battle for the aspiring rationalist.

Primary posts

Other posts

Related concepts