Sunk costs are basically money or time or effort spent in the past which make it difficult to pursue new actions or policies. It is classified as a logical fallacy. A simple example might be ordering a sandwich at a restaurant that turns out to be both delicious and WAY larger than you imagined. If it's me, this often leads to eating until I am uncomfortable since I already am paying for the entire sandwich.
I'm sure my childhood and being reminded of starving people in Africa -- and the need to clean my plate -- is a factor, but there is also that whole sunk cost fallacy working. I might not be getting my money's worth if I leave half a sandwich behind, despite feeling quite full and satisfied.
Another example of sunk costs might be when we drive through a blinding snowstorm to attend a concert or game because, by God!, we paid for those tickets and a little thing like risking our lives on the roads just isn't enough to keep us away.
Researchers say that we keep track of costs that exceed benefits in a separate "account" in our brains, and that even though the money or effort has been expended we can't quite let that money or effort go. Nothing is really lost beyond the experience.
When developing our arguments, we should keep "sunk costs" in mind as factors that might affect our positions. How much do we invest in maintaining old technology, for instance, rather than recycle or toss the old tech (like a phone) in favor of something much faster and more advanced?
After all, why change something that is working, even if "working" is a very low bar?
No comments:
Post a Comment