⛔ 001 The intuitive evaluation is NEVER biased
The intuitive evaluation originates from the emotion system and fulfills its own logic, which has nothing to do with a cognitive description like “biased”.
Bias presupposes that the intuitive evaluation would have to be biased in the making process. However, cognitive artifacts are created later in time, after the intuitive evaluation already exists.
The process and time of emotive and intuitive decision-making is ignored!
Emotive and cognitive processes and artifacts are mismatched!
⛔ 002 Human intuition is NOT based on probabilities
Intuitive evaluation is based on emotive logic, which is brought about in the emotion system before cognition.
Probabilities are a cognitive construct that would need cognitive logic. Cognitive artifacts, such as a probability, are produced chronologically after intuitive evaluation.
The process and time of emotive and intuitive decision-making is ignored!
Emotive and cognitive processes and artifacts are mismatched!
🎯 003 YES, Science is indeed on the wrong track. The accumulation of “bias” is only a sign
First of all, behavior and decisions are very different artifacts that are equated and confused with each other.
The process of behavior is ignored!
- Emotive perception (sensing)
- Emotive decision
- Emotive behavior as autopilot
- Cognitive perception like seeing
- Emotive-cognitive decision-making
- Behavior based on Emotive-cognitive decision-making
The supposedly rational decision does not exist, neither as an artifact in the human decision process. Without existing comparative value, deviations are without reference and science on the wrong track.
The research results of behavioral economics (Daniel Kahneman, Richard H. Thaler) as well as those of scientific research are ignored.
So also the external decision need (decision architecture) cannot be evaluated with the supposed rational decision.
The process and time of emotive and intuitive decision-making is ignored!
The process of perception is ignored!
KiE the inseparability of body, emotions, intuition and cognition (Graf, Richard 2018) was already published in 2018: chapters 3 to 7. KiE explains Cognitive Biases, Noise and Nudges (Biases) coherent as natural phenomena of human decision making.
Biases reveals how decisions are brought about by emotion and cognition without an 3rd control system. Irrational and rational decisions are based on the same emotive and cognitive processes.
The number and inconsistencies in biases and between them will increase because science is on the wrong track.
⛔ 004 A pluralistic approach is NOT necessary because a Grand Theory is NOT too complex
A pluralistic or situated approach would ignore the simple fact that the situation is an external stimulus to the human decision process.
The process of perception is ignored!
Science and research would again take a wrong path, only more complex.
The external and the internal sensory Stimulus must become part of the human decision making process.
The situational nature of human behavior is explained with the Grand Theory. The Grand Theory was already published in 2018 and explains the phenomena like Cognitive, Biases, Noise and Nudges as well as human behavior.
KiE is based on the fact that external as well as internal stimulus are only sensory artifacts, which are first processed emotive in the human decision-making process and then cognitive.
The diversity of human decisions is produced because of the recursive processes based on internal stimulus.
⛔ 005 NO, the Grand Theory is NOT complex
The Grand Theory is already published. (Graf, 2018). The inseparability of Body, Emotions, Intuition and Cognition (KiE) is discovered and gives a coherent and explanation of Cognitive Biases, Noise and Nudges (Biases).
The Grand Theory identifies the situation as an external sensory stimulus that achieves its meaning later in time. Decisions are made on the basis of the internal world view, not on the basis of the external situation.
A pluralistic approach would lead sciences and all involved people even further down the wrong path. This path would become even more complex because it is simply wrong. Those who already went down the wrong path would defend it and prevent innovation for all people.
The process and time of emotive, intuitive and emotive-cognitive decision-making is ignored!
Emotive and cognitive processes and artifacts are mismatched!
⛔ 006 Human behavior is NOT HOPELESS (subpar)
Human behavior is chronologically preceded by a decision: emotive, intuitive, and emotive-cognitive.
Human decision making is human, thus emotive, intuitive and emotive-cognitive.
The process and time of emotive, intuitive and emotive-cognitive decision-making is ignored!
Emotive and cognitive processes and artifacts are mismatched!
“Hopeless” is a cognitive evaluation into the future and ignores the emotive part of being human. Human behavior leads to destruction:
🚫 They produce meeting madness.
🚫 They let 75% of all projects fail partially or completely
🚫 They destroy agile methods
🚫 They take away the chance for young people to develop and grow
🚫 They lead people into “Great Resignation”, “Quiet Quitting” as well as into Bore- and Burnout
🚫 They split society
🚫 They make wars
🚫 They destroy our earth
With Decision-Making Management (DMM) based on the Grand Theory, jointly supported team decisions can be brought about safely and promptly for teams or groups of any size. This would change people’s behavior immediately.
People can go into hope with DMM.
⛔ 007 Human behavior is NOT (hopeless) SUBPAR
Human behavior is NOT (hopeless) SUBPAR. Human behavior measured against human behavior is ALWAYS average.
Emotive and cognitive processes and artifacts are mismatched!
The anthropocentric assumptions that there is a better human behavior than human behavior could be called “biased.”
The again introduction of the alleged rational decision, without naming it doesn’t help.
Human behavior is chronologically preceded by a decision: emotive, intuitive, and emotive-cognitive. That is human behavior:
🚫 They produce meeting madness.
🚫 They let 75% of all projects fail partially or completely
🚫 They destroy agile methods
🚫 They take away the chance for young people to develop and grow
🚫 They lead people into “Great Resignation”, “Quiet Quitting” as well as into Bore- and Burnout
🚫 They split society
🚫 They make wars
🚫 They destroy our earth
Emotive and cognitive processes and artifacts are mismatched!
With Decision-Making Management (DMM) jointly supported team decisions can be brought about safely and promptly for teams or groups of any size.
This would change people’s behavior immediately.
🎯 008 Share Definition von Biases are peculiar
This hypothesis is valid! YES, you see RIGHT, the way that behavioral economists define ‘bias’ is rather peculiar – Not scientific and NEVER nature-scientific.
The rational decision does not exist, neither as a human decision form nor as a theoretical construct, because both benefits and costs contain emotive parts.
If the comparison loses the reference value, the irrational decision does not exist either.
Emotive and cognitive processes and artifacts are mismatched!
The comparison between empirics and “something not existing” is peculiar. It can serve at most as a phenomenon that points to the human decision-making process. The supposedly rational decision and the supposedly irrational decision are emotive-cognitive decisions (human decisions).
Phenomena and facts are mismatched!
No logical cognitive thinking!
🎯 009 YES, when behavioral economists (BE) observe behavior that doesn’t fit their model, they add a ‘bias’ to their list.
It is to be expected that BE scientists, uphold the model of supposedly rational decisions.
The research results of behavioral economics (Daniel Kahneman, Richard H. Thaler) as well as those of scientific research are ignored.
The list of biases will grow longer. The split between supposedly irrational and rational decisions will become deeper. The Grand Theory already identifies (Graf, 2018) both artifacts as emotive-cognitive decisions brought about from the human decision-making process.
Without a point of reference, biases lose completely their explanatory power, increasing the pressure for maintaining an “idealized decision.”
The inconsistencies of psychological models require a coherent “Grand Theory,” which critics attack as too complex.
Caught in this dilemma, critics follow the “biased” complexity assumption and postulate situated models, which
- lengthens the list of biases and
- increases the number of their inconsistencies in their explanation.
Total chaos and devaluation of BE knowledge threatens.
Science is indeed on the wrong track. But the accumulation of “bias” is a very valuable reference.
With “The Grand Theory” (KiE), the achievements of economics would flow back into and enrich BE, psychology, as well as evolutionary biology, computer science with AI, and many others.
The comparison with the Ptolemaic scientists by @Colin Strong is well chosen. They too were forced to introduce auxiliary constructs to hold on to the geocentric model. In the end, people with words like sunrise and sunset hold on to the outdated worldview to this day.
Bertolt Brecht described the ignorance, resistance and especially the aggression that awaits innovators even today (“The Life of Galileo”).
Thinking with a Grand Theory is grand and radical, but also disruptive and dangerous today as it was then. Copernicus published 1543 a “raw” heliocentric worldview. On February 17, 1600, Giordano Bruno was executed at the stake on the Campo de’ Fiori. Galileo Galilei was grounded 1633-1642 and his model was not published. After his death it was published only as “Mathematical Model”, NOT as physical Modell.
⛔ 010 By Natural Selection
Darwin “On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection” would help, but NOT the discussed anthropocentric “biased” theory of evolution: “Survival of the fittest”.
Darwins first focus 1859 was: “by Means of Natural Selection”
Emotive and cognitive processes and artifacts are mismatched!
Approximately 99.997% of the evolution process human beings were not part of evolution and natural selection. Therefore goals and motives or other cognitive concepts could not be the driver for human evolution.
It is very implausible and can be excluded that in the 0.003% of the evolutionary process a special driver like cognitive concepts were the motivation for human evolution.
This anthropocentric bias affects almost all explanations and justifications, which are also themselves cognitive concepts. This inconsistency is demonstrated by cognitive Biases, noise and nudges.
Calling for evolutionary theory would lead us directly down the wrong path, as Behavioral Economics shows.
The principle “survival of the fittest” was NOT the driver of evolution and selection. It came later from Herbert Spencer in 1864 and leads to the invalidation of the selection theory. Probably the biggest Cognitive Bias: The Anthropocentric Bias. Humans try to explain phenomena with human principles when humans were not there respectively where they had no influence.
The theory of evolution for humans is waiting to be written. They are not yet extinct to validate the selection theory.
The Grand Theory could only be discovered by attending to emotive processes that have been part of evolution 7,000 times longer than humans.
Emotive logic is very old (4.300 Mio. years) but very unusual to think cognitively. Cognitive logic is young probably 0,12 to 0,30 Mio. years.
011 to . . . More topics
⛔ 🎯 Behavioral Economic Science headed down the wrong track!
_______________
April 2022, Richard Graf & Elsa Graf
“Use Decision-Making Management (DMM) aligned at the Inseparability of emotions, intuition and Cognition (KiE)”, Richard Graf.
Source
“We don’t have a hundred biases, we have the wrong model” (Jason Collins, 2022), Work in Progress: https://worksinprogress.co/issue/biases-the-wrong-model.
“Is behavioural science using the wrong model?” (Colin Strong, 2023), Frontline BeSci: https://www.frontlinebesci.com/p/has-behavioural-science-got-the-wrong.
The Grand Theory (Richard Graf, 2018): The inseparability of body, emotions, intuition, and cognition (KiE). “Die neue Entscheidungskultur” (link: homepage).
Libet Experiment (Benjamin Libet, 1973).
Speed of processing in the human visual system (Simon Thorpe, 1996).
The Manifesto for Decision-Making Management (Richard Georg Graf, Laura Anna Graf, et al., 2023 in progress).
On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection (Charles Darwin, 1859).
Principles of Biology (Herbert Spencer 1864).