Abstract
Bennis, Medin, and Bartels (2010, this issue) have contributed an interesting article on the comparative benefit of moral rules versus cost-benefit analysis (CBA). Many of their specific comments are accurate, useful, and insightful. At the same time, we believe they have misrepresented CBA and have reached a set of conclusions that are misguided and, if adopted wholesale, potentially dangerous. Overall, they offer wise suggestions for making CBA more effective, rather than eliminating CBA as a decision-making tool.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
