I think we should make an important distinction here: why do people adopt en masse new beliefs and behaviors, rational or not?
Do they adopt them because they become convinced of their truth, or by considering the evidence for and against them? Or do they adopt them for the same reasons they adopted the irrational ideas they are replacing—through cultural effects, following prestigious leaders and popular opinion?
I am not, by the way, trying to denigrate consensus-following. It’s quite a good heuristic. But it’s not what we usually mean by “rational behavior”; it is more nearly instinctive than conscious.
A lot of decision making techniques that people are actually using aren’t “rationality techniques”. Focusing on “rationality techniques” means that you don’t count that churches get their members to pray.
If the churches have good strategies for getting their members to engage into practicing certain behavior copying those techniques might be better.
I see what you’re getting at, although praying is a bad example—most people pray because their parents and community prayed, and we’re looking at ways to lead people away from what their parents and community had done. The Protestant Reformation might be a better case study, or the rise of Biblical literalism, or the abandonment of the prohibition on Christians lending money at interest.
I think we should make an important distinction here: why do people adopt en masse new beliefs and behaviors, rational or not?
Do they adopt them because they become convinced of their truth, or by considering the evidence for and against them? Or do they adopt them for the same reasons they adopted the irrational ideas they are replacing—through cultural effects, following prestigious leaders and popular opinion?
I am not, by the way, trying to denigrate consensus-following. It’s quite a good heuristic. But it’s not what we usually mean by “rational behavior”; it is more nearly instinctive than conscious.
That’s a very good point, although I think a good a first stage is to find what techniques people are actually using, then try and understand why.
A good second stage is to look for techniques that were publicized and not used, and see why some techniques gained currency while others did not.
A lot of decision making techniques that people are actually using aren’t “rationality techniques”. Focusing on “rationality techniques” means that you don’t count that churches get their members to pray.
If the churches have good strategies for getting their members to engage into practicing certain behavior copying those techniques might be better.
I see what you’re getting at, although praying is a bad example—most people pray because their parents and community prayed, and we’re looking at ways to lead people away from what their parents and community had done. The Protestant Reformation might be a better case study, or the rise of Biblical literalism, or the abandonment of the prohibition on Christians lending money at interest.