>> Jay Hanson wrote:
>> Most of you probably know this, but modern biology doesn't agree with the
>> economist's rational man model(s). If anyone is interested I can explain
>> further...

>Jim Devine
>please do! BTW, it seems like Dawkins stuff about "selfish genes" fits
>with economics.

PART 1 RATIONAL MAN: With respect to the economic homo economicus model, 
biologists call this a "domain general" model.  The jargon is confusing.

"Domain" means "problem" in evolutionary psychology, so economists are using a 
"problem general" model of human behavior. In other words, economists assume 
that all behavior is a product of a universal problem-solving, MATHEMATICAL 
computer. Rational man is said to look at the choices and COMPUTE (solve Bayes 
equations) the optimum (or nearly optimum) behavior. Although economists do not 
explicitly specify economicus that way, nothing else could optimize like that. 
This model is also called a "pursuer" because economicus actively "pursues" a 
certain outcome.

Biologists say that's not the way that animals make decisions. Moreover, a 
general-purpose computing device like that couldn't have evolved.  Animals are 
adaption "executers," not "pursuers."  In other words, animals use "logic" 
instead of "math" to make decisions.

Humans evolved behavioral "algorithms" (rules of behavior in the form "IF this 
THEN that") to solve specific reproductive problems in the EEA  
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionary_psychology#Human_EEA>  We also grow 
and modify behavioral algorithms throughout our lives.

So, to make a long story short, advertisers appeal to behavioral algorithms to 
sell their products. Typical behavior might be initiated when someone sees an 
advertisement that produces "feel good" neurotransmitters in the brain (e.g., 
dopamine) which then causes the consumer to buy the product. The logical 
behavior is rationalized after the decision is made subconsciously. Neither 
"utils," nor anything else, is optimized.

It's almost like a reflex. The doctor whacks someone on the knee and the innate 
reflex makes the leg pop up.  Advertisers whack people with an image that 
causes them to invent reasons to buy their products.  It's more complicated 
than that, but you should get the general idea...

PART 2 SELFISH GENES: Richard Dawkins' "selfish genes" metaphor has been almost 
universally misunderstood. "Selfish genes" does not mean a selfish person.  
It's simply a way of looking at evolution as though animals act on behalf of 
their genes:

"It rapidly became clear to me that the most imaginative way of looking at 
evolution, and the most inspiring way of teaching it, was to say that it’s all 
about the genes. It’s the genes that, for their own good, are manipulating the 
bodies they ride about in. The individual organism is a survival machine for 
its genes." – Richard Dawkins

So-called "selfish genes" create people who both cooperate and compete at the 
same time (e.g., the best team player). With respect to "selfishness," it's 
actually our innate drive for "status" that has been transmogrified into a 
drive for money (political power). The drive for "status" is one of our 
most-powerful innate drives. 

Jay

_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

Reply via email to