Flipism, sometimes spelled "flippism", is a personal philosophy under whichdecisions are made byflipping a coin. It originally appeared in theDonald DuckDisney comic "Flip Decision"[1][2] byCarl Barks, published in 1953. Barks called a practitioner of "flipism" a "flippist".[3][4]
An actual coin is not necessary: dice or anotherrandom generator may be used for decision making.
Flipism can be seen as anormativedecision theory, although it does not fulfill the criteria ofrationality.
In the original 1952 comic book,Donald Duck meets the eccentric Professor Batty, who persuades Donald to make decisions based on flipping a coin at every crossroad of life:[5] "Life is but a gamble! Let flipism chart your ramble!" Donald soon gets into trouble when following this advice. He drives a one way road in the wrong direction and is fined $50. The reason for the fine is not his bad driving, but rather the fact that he relied on a coin to do his thinking instead of deciding for himself.[6]
Flipism is a normativedecision theory in a sense that it prescribes how decisions should be made. In the comic, flipism shows remarkable ability to make right conclusions without any information—but only once in a while. In reality, flipping a coin would only lead to random decisions. However, there is an article about benefits of somerandomness in the decision-making process in certain conditions. It notes:[7]
Though the author himself may have intended this as a rejection of the idea that rationality (in the standard sense) has some special claim to superiority as a basis for making decisions, what he may really have discovered are the potential benefits of strategic commitment to randomization.
Commitment to a non-trivial mixed strategy can be beneficial for the informed party in a potential conflict under asymmetric information, as it allows the player to manipulate an opponent’s beliefs in an optimal fashion. Such a strategy also makes the player less inclined to enter into conflict when it is avoidable.
Another way of seeing the utility of flipism in decision-making can be called "revealed preferences". In the traditional form, revealed preferences mean that the preferences of consumers can be revealed by their purchasing habits. With flipism, the preferences can be revealed to the decision-maker themselves. Decisions with conflicting preferences are especially difficult even in situations where there is only one decision-maker and no uncertainty. The decision options may be either all appealing or all unpleasant, and therefore the decision-maker is unable to choose. Flipism,i.e., flipping a coin can be used to find a solution. However, the decision-maker should not decide based on the coin but instead observe their own feelings about the outcome; whether it was relieving or agonizing. In this way, flipism removes the mental block related to the act of decision-making, and the post-decision preferences can be revealed before the decision is actually made. An example of revealed preferences is embodied in theOld Testament story, the "Judgment of Solomon", whereinKing Solomon offered to resolve achild custody dispute by ordering the baby cut in two, and upon seeing the reactions made an award.
Still a third approach is to look at flipism as the endpoint of a continuum bounded on the other side by perfectlyrational decision-making. Flipism requires the minimum possible cognitive overhead to make decisions, at the price of making sub-optimal choices. Truly rational decision-making requires a tremendous investment in information and cognition to arrive at an optimal decision. However, the expectedmarginal value of information gathered (discounted for risk and uncertainty) is often lower than themarginal cost of the information or processing itself. The concept ofbounded rationality posits that people employcognitive parsimony, gathering only what they expect to be sufficient information to arrive at asatisficing (or "good enough") solution. Flipism is therefore a rational strategy to employ when the cost of information is very high relative to its expected value, and using it is an example ofmotivated tactical thinking.
This is a commonly recognizeddecision making technique used in everyday life. Other similar methods include:
These forms are in contradistinction toanalytics, a commonly used method of data-based decision making.[8]
According to Kevin Durand and Mary Leigh, flipism is "a psychological tool, and not an agent of fate".[9] It is neither a revelation of the wishes of the head of state (e.g.,Julius Caesar, whose head was on the coin,ergo, heads showed "Caesar's will") nor the divination of a deity's will.[9]
There are those who view the resort to flipism to be a disavowal of responsibility for making personal and societal decisions based upon rationality.[6][citation needed] However, in the end, flipism shows surprising efficiency in guiding some decisions.[6][citation needed][10]
Ingame theory,negotiations,nuclear deterrence,diplomacy and otherconflict theories—rationality,realpolitik orrealism can themselves limit strategies and results. They can limit the ability of a player to make demands or get its own way throughbluffing,bullying, instilling fear, causingapprehension, orpsychologically manipulation or sending a heeded warning — and therefore can increase the likelihood that an opposing party may engage in objectionable or unwelcome behavior. If one knows the lines and can predict the response, thenpredictability andproportionality become a restraint, not avirtue. Consequently, "taunting a junkyard dog[a] is OK, if you know you are beyond the reach of itstether."[7] Thus irrationality (real or perceived) can be an important countervailing tool or strategy, particularly as adeterrent and if it engenders hesitation, fear, negotiation and resolution, or change of course.[11] However, alternate strategies such ashonesty, building aclimate of trust,respect, usingintermediaries,mediation or other forms ofconflict resolution, sanctions, patience, process, data and reasoning might still be available, as might strategies like so-calledwin-win bargaining (also called "interest-based" bargaining) – which tries to reach an accord based on interests, not necessarily onpositions,power,rights ordistribution.[12] Another approach isCooperative bargaining and gain sharing.
Flipism is a filmtrope that is used to argue for "the supremacy of free will in a chaotic world".[9]
Whenever you're called on to make up your mind, and you're hampered by not having any, the best way to solve the dilemma, you'll find, is simply by spinning a penny. No – not so that chance shall decide the affair, while you're passively standing there moping, but the moment the penny is up in the air, you suddenly know what you're hoping.
Notes
Sources