Kniha Patterns, Thinking, and Cognition - A Theory of Judgment Howard Margolis

Patterns, Thinking, and Cognition - A Theory of Judgment

Jazyk: Angličtina
Vazba: Brožovaná
Dostupnost: Skladem u dodavatele
Odesíláme za 9-15 dnů
979
For decades, both policymakers and analysts have been frustrated by sharp and stubborn conflicts bet...

Informace o knize

Jazyk
Angličtina
Vazba
Kniha - Brožovaná
Vydáno
1990
Stránek
340
EAN
9780226505282
ISBN
0226505286
Enbook ID
04547228
Hmotnost
556
Rozměry
158 x 231 x 22

Kompletní popis

For decades, both policymakers and analysts have been frustrated by sharp and stubborn conflicts between expert and lay perceptions on issues of environmental risk. For example, most experts - even those opposed to nuclear power on other grounds - would see precautions like those now in place as adequate to protect against risks from nuclear waste. But the public finds that very hard to believe. Similar sharp conflicts of expert/lay intuition are evident on a wide range of risk issues, from the safety of bendictin as a treatment for morning sickness to the safety of irradiation of food to destroy microorganisms. In Dealing with Risk, Howard Margolis explores the expert/lay rift surrounding such contentious issues and provides a provocative new account. The usual explanation of expert/lay conflicts is that experts are focused only on a narrow notion of risk - such as potential fatalities - but lay intuition is concerned about a wide range of further concerns, such as fairness and voluntariness of exposure. Margolis argues that this "rival rationalities" view in a fundamental way misses the point of these controversies, since the additional dimensions of lay concern often are more plausibly interpreted as reflections of lay concern than as causes. Margolis argues that risk assessment typically involves weighing a broad range of often complicated trade-offs between costs and benefits. As laypersons, however, we are by definition forced to make judgments on complex matters beyond the scope of our normal experience. Especially in cases involving potential danger, we frequently discount nuance and respond more viscerally. Cognitively we fall back on default responses, all-purpose intuitionssuch as "better safe than sorry" or "nothing ventured, nothing gained." Such intuitions don't admit of careful balancing of pros and cons, and lay opinion consequently becomes polarized and at odds with the expert view.

Mohlo by vás zajímat

475

Understanding Rhetoric

Eamon Cunningham
831
684

Mercies

Kiran Millwood Hargrave
220
533
963

Mindf*ck

Christopher Wylie
268
342
220

Visual Thinking Workbook

Willemien Brand Brand
280

Life 3.0

Max Tegmark
268

The City of Brass

S. A. Chakraborty
212

Reductionism in Art and Brain Science

Eric (Columbia University Medical Center) Kandel
429