As long as we don't know what the weighting process is, we shouldn't make unfounded statements about how it works. You're asserting that it exists, but nobody knows anything about what it is. It's a program that you haven't read the source code for.

At this point we seem to be reasoning by analogy. We'd do better to just study the fact of the matter. Psychologists do not tend to discuss this topic in terms of weightings.

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/tippling/2013/11/14/post-hoc-r...

http://www.theunconsciousconsumer.com/consumer-psychology/20... (regrettably thin on citations)

https://academic.oup.com/scan/article/6/4/460/1648209

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rationalization_(psychology)

I'm not reasoning by analogy; I'm disputing that it's useful.

If you look at the physical world with objects that have relationships and characteristics, and describe a mental world that also has discrete entities that interact in designated ways, then I think you are reasoning by (unfounded) analogy.