Abstract
The literatures on bounded and ecological rationality are built on adaptationism—and its associated modular, cognitivist and computational paradigm—that does not address or explain the evolutionary origins of rationality. We argue that the adaptive mechanisms of evolution are not sufficient for explaining human rationality, and we posit that human rationality presents exaptive origins, where exaptations are traits evolved for other functions or no function at all, and later co-opted for new uses. We propose an embodied reconceptualization of rationality—embodied rationality—based on the reuse of the perception-action system, where many neural processes involved in the control of the sensory-motor system, salient in ancestral environments have been later co-opted to create—by tinkering—high-level reasoning processes, employed in civilized niches.
Highlights
I counted the panda’s other digits and received an even greater surprise: there were five, not four
Simon’s view, heuristics are rules of thumb—instantiations of bounded rationality—that produce solutions adapted to specific task environments, given limited information, time and cognitive capabilities
We amend and reconceptualize bounded and ecological rationality, by discussing the reuse of the perception-action system: many neural processes involved in the control of the sensory-motor system, which were salient in ancestral environments, have been later co-opted to shape—via tinkering—high-level cognitive faculties employed in civilized niches
Summary
I counted the panda’s other digits and received an even greater surprise: there were five, not four. Simon’s view, heuristics are rules of thumb—instantiations of bounded rationality—that produce solutions adapted to specific task environments, given limited information, time and cognitive capabilities. This adaptive dimension is part of the very definition of bounded rationality, known as the scissors’ metaphor: “Just as a scissors cannot cut paper without two blades, a theory of thinking and problem solving cannot predict behavior unless it encompasses both an analysis of the structure of task environments and an analysis of the limits of rational adaptation to task requirements” While Kahneman’s ‘heuristics and biases’ focus on the nature of dis-adaptation, in the sense that heuristics, automatically triggered, do not fit specific task environments (Tversky and Kahneman, 1974; Kahneman et al, 1982), Gigerenzer’s ‘ecological rationality’ emphasizes the fact that fast and frugal heuristics produce satisficing solutions, through ecological correlations (Gigerenzer and Selten, 2002; Gigerenzer and Gaissmaier, 2011)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
