What is the 'sunk cost fallacy'? Is it ever a good thing?

When we invest money, time or another resource we can’t get back, factoring that sunk cost into our future decisions can be a trap.

9 comments

This is such an odd title to an article. Is the fallacy ever a good thing? The fallacy itself is a concept - so not really good or bad. Using it as a logical premise in an argument is recognized to be problematic.

Are we actually asking: is ever good to keep doing something you yourself hate only because you yourself already spent money on it? The answer seems clearly to be no.
But be warned, this doesn’t work for everything: it seems that spending wildly on a wedding ceremony or engagement ring doesn’t have a “sunk cost” effect – it fails to increase the likelihood of staying married.

LOL
- Are you the one true creator of git and kernel? Or are you just some pretender to the throne?
  
  I'll say what Linus would say: You shouldn't trust me, even if I say that I'm THE LORD HIMSELF LINUS TORVALDS.
IMO, it is a fallacy because the mind couldn't distinguish if the past it is trying to compare correlates to the current situation.

It is similar to "what-about-ism" but with prices instead of other values being measured.

is it... a good thing?

there's some very situational cases where you'd actually want to fool yourself to fight a bigger issue (like laziness/ procrastination). that's why some people advise goes in a pattern like "start small" [if trying to start a new project] or "just write something" [for writer's block].

9 comments