[simonh]

Most of the decision making while shooting for a hoop in basketball (the example from the article) is subconscious and reflexive, while decisions made related to the conjunction fallacy are conscious. So it's quite possible different mechanisms are used in subconscious motor -control reflexes and conscious 'logical' decision making.

I realise both are implemented using neural networks, but as an analogy digital computers can implement bayesian algorithms, boolean algorithms, predicate logic, etc. It's quite possible our neural systems have optimised to different behaviours to solve different problems, and in _some_ cases these implement or approximate to Bayesian methods.

[gowld]

I don't think that's right, or at least not so binary. The average person (and even highly rational people, when they are being informal) uses "logical" reasononing that is intuitive, not calculated, not so different fro "muscle memory" of shooting hoops. Even professional mathematicians, (in published papers!) sometimes make statements that "feel" correct even though they are disproven under scrutiny (and not due to small (but important) mistakes like getting a sign wrong in a calculation)