Search Results

It is argued that false belief is often better for a person than true belief, by appeal to the psychological literature on “self-enhancement bias” – bias in favor of a positive self-conception. Such bias was described by Hume, who called it pride or “greatness of mind.” Empirical research on self-enhancement bias – overly positive self-evaluation, unrealistic optimism, and illusion of control – is reviewed. It is argued that such bias is often valuable vis-à-vis the wellbeing of the believer, and objections to this conclusion are presented and discussed.

This chapter begins with an overview of the encoding, storage, and retrieval of memories. Important to the encoding process are attention, focus, understanding, and the agility of the working memory. The role of emotion in memory storage is reviewed, with examples of how heightened emotion can enhance memory, or may interfere with it, if the emotion is too strong. Factors that bias our recall (such as cultural and other experiential elements, as well as the tendency toward self-enhancement), along with other characteristics (e.g., age, gender, lack of sleep) that are sometimes thought to be related to memory, are reviewed. Strategies for enhancing memory, including tailoring the information to the patient’s characteristics, considering health literacy, avoiding jargon and information overload, mnemonics and chunking, and multimedia memory aids, are given.

This chapter discusses law’s capacity to fulfil its conduct-guiding function within different frameworks of practical reasoning. A functional argument of Raz is initially presented: according to this argument, authorities—including legal authorities—would not be able to fulfil their intended function if their directives operated as reasons for action that compete with opposing reasons in terms of their weight, rather than as pre-emptive reasons (Section 6.1). Several grounds for this argument are considered and found to be inadequate (Section 6.2). The spotlight is then directed onto another relevant consideration: law’s structural suitability to counteract several situational biases operative in contexts of individual and collective action (Sections 6.3.1–6.3.5). It is argued that law’s pivotal role in addressing practical problems linked with those biases strongly militate against the weighing model (Sections 6.3.6). Finally, the implications of those biases for the pre-emption thesis are discussed (Sections 6.3.7).