The purpose of this paper is to examine the normative interpretation of the fast-and-frugal research program and in particular to contrast it with the normative reading of rational choice theory and behavioral economics. The ecological rationality of fast-and-frugal heuristics is admittedly a form of normative naturalism (Gigerenzer and Sturm 2012) - it derives what agents "ought" to do from that which "is" ecologically rational - and the paper will examine how this differs from the normative rationality associated with rational choice theory. I will also attempt to assess the relative adequacy of normative ecological rationality.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
D. Wade Hands (2014) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 3 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: