Hah! You're giving that guy credit for a level of psychological complexity he does not deserve. Of course criminals like to hang out with other criminals. The thing they have in common is not wanting to work for a living.

Rent Goodfellas again and note the Henry Hill narration about why he and his mob pals didn't work. It’s easier and more fun to steal. Any Sopranos episode has the same embedded message. Being “mobbed up” is not a solitary endeavor.

That said, there’s nothing irrational in how your thief thinks. He likes to pal around with fellow perps like the Gotti crew liked to pal around with fellow perps. But in the end it’s about money.

Here’s a thought experiment. What happens if someone in his circle of crime flips? What would be the value of “…trust, reciprocity, and friendship…” as he scrambles to CYA?

I agree with the last readers point in that criminals are often the worst kind of friends so the personal ties that they make are often dispensable. The idea of loyalty to a buisness, however, can be rewarding as well. In an era where employees have no loyalty to companies and companies have no loyalty to employees it's tempting to ascribe to a crime family loyalty. I live in Detroit and I watch people who have worked for Ford and GM for over 30 years be sent packing. Its about money in the legal buisness world too. It has to be! Perhaps true friendships are forged outside of work but aside from personal bonds, people are craving a commitment to a shared buisness venture. This is getting hard to come by and taking pride in work is becoming a part of the past. Perhaps the lack of face to face buisness interations is taking a toll on company loyalty.

I love your work. This article raises a question about definitions of rational and cost benefit analysis. Rational derives from ratio, weighing things. I think most often what we mean by irrational is what I'd call "Misdenominational." The "irrational" are still employing a comparison, a ratio. We just disagree with their choice of what to compare. We believe the denominator is wrong.

Indeed bounded rationality is a bit of a misnomer. It's not that rationality is limited. It's that rationality is occurring at multiple levels. Fast and frugal heuristics would be adopted because we satisfice--consciously or unconsciously we weigh the cost of thinking further and opt not to, because it's not efficient in the grand scheme of things. It's not worth to think further on some matter. In a cost benefit analysis of activities available to us.

If you find the time to think further on this matter, I'd welcome a piece distinguishing irrational from meta-rational; distinguishing cost benefit analysis from inclusive cost benefit analysis--the kind of cost benefit analysis that includes the psychic cost of loss, or the benefit of social meaning.

Thanks,

Jeremy Sherman

The same need for connection that this post describes, also applies very strongly to people grappling with chronic illness. Along with expert medical care, these people also need to remain connected, and to believe others understand and appreciate what they're going through. More and more, this responsibility has shifted from the physician to the pharmaceutical company. Read my blog post about this: http://truehealth.typepad.com/ryan_truehealth_pov/2008/12/the-importance...