Is it possible that this reflects a little confirmation bias? Intuitively, allowing more random thinking at the beginning of the process makes sense. But a question arises about how you define 'crazy' in a way that limits the field of possibilities from which theories are formed and tested. Also how well does this address the problems of rationality you identify.
As an aside, the process you outline lends itself (I think) to more group based thinking at the beginning of the process to ensure you trap enough diversity and step outside the constraints of rationality.
It's quite likely that this reflects confirmation bias, but I'm not sure I understand how you are thinking it does.
A short summary of my thinking here is that we tend to test rationality on whether it makes sense given how we already think. Instead, I think we should test it more on whether a theory (or hunch or worldview) is coherent and actually explains the world when we look closely. So I'm generally happy to go crazy with the field of possibilities from which theories are formed but test them harshly and quickly.
I was cheekily suggesting that the build up of your own theory represented a case of confirmation bias. I should have expressed it more clearly or, perhaps, not at all!
This is excellent but.......I wonder
Is it possible that this reflects a little confirmation bias? Intuitively, allowing more random thinking at the beginning of the process makes sense. But a question arises about how you define 'crazy' in a way that limits the field of possibilities from which theories are formed and tested. Also how well does this address the problems of rationality you identify.
As an aside, the process you outline lends itself (I think) to more group based thinking at the beginning of the process to ensure you trap enough diversity and step outside the constraints of rationality.
It's quite likely that this reflects confirmation bias, but I'm not sure I understand how you are thinking it does.
A short summary of my thinking here is that we tend to test rationality on whether it makes sense given how we already think. Instead, I think we should test it more on whether a theory (or hunch or worldview) is coherent and actually explains the world when we look closely. So I'm generally happy to go crazy with the field of possibilities from which theories are formed but test them harshly and quickly.
I was cheekily suggesting that the build up of your own theory represented a case of confirmation bias. I should have expressed it more clearly or, perhaps, not at all!