There is an old cliché that states that a person is an exemplar of rationality and a guardian of the mind. This idea comes from the Enlightenment era. Now, as optimism has gone out of fashion, psychological research collected over the last 150 years has shown how far from rationality we truly are.
Let's explore this from an evolutionary-psychological perspective. Instead of making assumptions, as 19th-century thinkers did, believing that the human mind is ideally suited to execute rational commands, it is better to think of the mind as an evolved mechanism capable of fulfilling evolutionary needs. What we should expect from the mind is not necessarily rationality itself, but rather what would most help us survive.
If the brain evolved to help us survive under the conditions in which early humans lived, it should not be surprising that the mind has mastered the areas it should understand in such a case. Why would primates in the jungle or savannah need to hone the mind's ability to calculate probabilities accurately?
We need to understand what our mind is for and accept it as a tool that helps us reason but also has its flaws. Our brains are prone to errors, and in poker, these errors can be the cause of downfall. The only way to avoid this is to inform ourselves and try to consciously deal with these mistakes.
Regarding cognitive limitations, there are two major ideas. The first speaks of bounded rationality. Bounded rationality is the thesis that human rationality is constructed from three factors: the information available to a person, the limitations of processing that information, and the amount of time available to make a decision. Although we can imagine some ideal rationality that considers all possible factors, perfectly weighs them, thinks them through, and dispassionately draws conclusions to choose the best decision, people do not do this. We simply cannot do it. “True” rationality is a fantasy, at least for us humans. The best we can do is a partial version of rationality, adapted to our mind's mechanism.
The other concept we have already encountered is cognitive biases. Cognitive biases are consistent patterns of errors in human thinking. These biases are best understood as having evolved for certain reasons. For example, they may be beneficial for cultural or emotional well-being, or they may function as an efficient problem-solving methodology, allowing us to make simple decisions much faster in situations where accuracy is not crucial.
There are many abilities that evolution has deemed more important than rationality. These include speed, efficiency, and of course, the ability to survive. In this way, our evolved mind prioritizes a convenient illusion over reality. But the skills important to poker players are entirely different from the traits selected and refined by evolution. In poker, indifference and cold rationality are valued. There is no place for illusions in poker. The closer you are to reality, the better poker player you become.
