[bobthechef]

It sound like you're talking about, or at least brushing up against, prudential judgement[0]. Sometimes, the optimal move is not to seek the optimum.

An obvious class of problems is where determining the optimum takes more time than the lifetime of the problem. Say you need to write an algorithm at work that does X, and you need X by tomorrow. If it would take you a week to find the theoretical optimum, then the optimum in a "global" sense is to deliver the best you can within the constraints, not the abstract theoretical optimum. The time to produce the solution is part of the total cost. An imprudent person would either say it's not possible, or never deliver the solution in time.

[0] https://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12517b.htm

[JoshCole]

Yeah, that is pretty close to what I'm talking about. Coming at it from a different perspective - learning theory - but it seems to be the same overarching idea. I'm extending it a little though to something similar to anachronistic reasoning being incorrect - you can't divorce prudential decisions from their context. When you do judgement of the decisions is flawed because it doesn't acknowledge the actual constraints the decision was made under.