Jianfei Shao

Random decision-making (RDM) is a method of choice in which an agent delegates the final selection to a random device (e.g., a coin). When faced with multiple options, RDM is often dismissed as an irrational approach. Even in symmetrical cases where RDM is conceded to be rational, it is typically regarded as merely one among many equally effective methods for making an arbitrary choice. I challenge this prevailing view by pinpointing a unique psychological benefit of RDM – specifically, its capacity to mitigate potential regret – and thereby demonstrating that its rational applicability extends well beyond the narrow confines hitherto acknowledged. Once this capacity is recognized, it becomes clear that RDM is the uniquely rational strategy in certain symmetrical dilemmas while remaining rational in some asymmetrical cases. Furthermore, while factors such as affective and sociocultural influences impose limitations on the practice of RDM, I contend that these constraints are not insurmountable and may be mitigated as a deeper understanding of RDM’s unique value emerges.

ABSTRACT Cryonics offers certain individuals the opportunity to preserve their bodies or brains with the potential for future revival. Proponents of this technology often invoke Pascal’s wager to argue that we all have a prudential reason to embrace cryonics: if future technology enables the revival of those who have been frozen, they stand to gain immense benefits; if not, undergoing cryonics is no worse than facing death directly. However, the cryonics wager carries hidden risks, not only in terms of whether future generations will be able to revive us, but also in terms of how they will choose to treat us. Given that the potential returns of the cryonics wager are not necessarily positive, it is not a guaranteed investment but rather an uncertain venture. I demonstrate that the risks of cryonics vary from person to person, making it a safer option for those who are talented, kind, and hold a weak view of personal identity. This leads to a paradoxical conclusion: those most suited for cryonics might be those least keen on this technology.