Sincerity vs. Rationality (Re: [EM] Problems with finding the probable best governor)

[Rob Lanphier]

My apologies for flitting in on such a minor point, but it did seem worth
pointing out to me on my quick reading of Blake's mail:

On Mon, 24 Jul 2000, Blake Cretney wrote:
> That
> doesn't mean that I actually believe that everyone will always rank
> sincerely, just that to answer certain questions, one must assume
> this, much as economists will use the assumption that everyone
> behaves rationally, but are aware that this is not the case.

This is flawed logic.  Note that economists assume that people are
rational, not that they are honest or forthcoming.  In trying to
understand aggregate behavior, one must assume that people *will* withhold
information if it is of value for them to do so.  

I think if we actually assume that voters are "rational", like economists
do, we assume they will withhold information (i.e. their sincere
preference) if and when it benifits them.  Thus, we need to assume that
people will vote strategically. 

I realize you are merely saying you are making a simplifying assumption in
order to test theories more easily.  However, economists leave out
"irrationality" only out of necessity -- it's hard to measure or account
for (just like physicist leave out friction in trying to understand
more fundemental principles -- it's often a noise variable that's better 
left as a tail end calculation).  

Ignoring strategy in voting is like ignoring energy in physics, or
selfishness in economics.  It's just not done. 

Carry on  :)

Rob Lanphier
robla at eskimo.com
http://www.eskimo.com/~robla