I shorten this to remove politically incorrect part. The complete version is in http://freemarketforever.com/2012/03/22/alternative-to-homo-economicus-2/
Homo Economicus has a few problems.
1. It’s too broad. All it says is you have a (set of) utility function(s) that’s equivalent under any linear affine transformation with positive slope. It doesn’t say what’s humans’ typical utility function is. It’s definition of selfish is intuitively misleading. Most utility function that people come up with is simply false.
2. It works in as if basis.Humans are not truly rational. They just behave as if they do. Believing that humans are homo economic us is then like believing that the sun revolves around the earth.
3. It’s not true. Most humans have inconsistent goal or simply don’t have any consistent utility function.
Some alternatives/more narrow models that’s not obvious from mere definition of homo economicus are:
1. Humans are power hungry psychopaths that want to maximize power so they can use it to manipulate others. This explains why we have so many laws against consensual acts. That explains why totally save ganja is illegal, for example, so that politicians can control what you consume. Voters also want to run your life so they support it. In the main article I jokingly called that homo psychopathus.
2. Selfish genes theory. Humans, like all other species want to maximize their reproductive success. Men and women are significantly different that they have totally different strategies to mate. This aspects are absent from most economy classes and not talked about.
3. Humans are hypocrites. Namely that they hide their utility function and the fact that they’re psychopaths so they can be more accepted by societies. People do not openly prohibit ganja and claim they want power. They bullshit first claiming that it’s dangerous. This is the main reason why most humans don’t look like psychopaths even though they behave like ones.
4. Rather than maximizing their self interests, humans actively want suffering for others. This explain all the genocides and voters tendency to ruin economy by demanding governments’ intervention.
While all those may still be part of homo economicus with creative creation of utility functions there are models that may be outside of it.
Humans and all other species, simply repeat what works and avoid what doesn’t. Here, they don’t necessarily have any utility function. I think this is the closest to actual decision making humans do. It’s simple enough and it’s actually more accurate and predictive.
More on that is in evolutionary psychology. It’s as if, as Richard Dawkins said, the genes and the memes, are the one having utility functions, rather than individuals.
Incoming search terms:
- powered by phpBB definition (172)
- powered by phpBB drug and alcohol rehabilitation (17)
- powered by phpBB economics definition (3)