But how large should you set the utilities of psychology that make you treat two descriptions of the same set of outcomes differently?
As far as I’m concerned, zero; we agree on this. My point was only that it’s misleading to say “the same set of outcomes” or “the same circumstance” for the same amount of money; a different thing happens to get to the same monetary endpoint. It’s not a difference that I (or my idealized self) care(s) about, though.
Similarly, I think it’s misleading to say “choosing 1A and 2B is irrational” without adding the caveat “if utility is solely a function of money, not how you got that money”.
But how large should you set the utilities of psychology that make you treat two descriptions of the same set of outcomes differently?
As far as I’m concerned, zero; we agree on this. My point was only that it’s misleading to say “the same set of outcomes” or “the same circumstance” for the same amount of money; a different thing happens to get to the same monetary endpoint. It’s not a difference that I (or my idealized self) care(s) about, though.
Similarly, I think it’s misleading to say “choosing 1A and 2B is irrational” without adding the caveat “if utility is solely a function of money, not how you got that money”.