Risk and cost of capital introduce very strange twists on expected utility.
Assume that living has a greater expected utility to me than any monetary value. If I need a $20,000 operation within the next 3 hours to live, I have no other funding, and you make me offer 1, it is completely rational and unbiased to take option 1A. It is the difference between a 100% of living and a 97% chance of living.
If I have $1,000,000,000 in the bank and command of legal or otherwise armed forces, I may just have you killed—for I would not tolerate such frivolous philosophizing.
Risk and cost of capital introduce very strange twists on expected utility.
Assume that living has a greater expected utility to me than any monetary value. If I need a $20,000 operation within the next 3 hours to live, I have no other funding, and you make me offer 1, it is completely rational and unbiased to take option 1A. It is the difference between a 100% of living and a 97% chance of living.
If I have $1,000,000,000 in the bank and command of legal or otherwise armed forces, I may just have you killed—for I would not tolerate such frivolous philosophizing.