Rational Thinking
Posted: October 2nd, 2007 | Author: Sam | Filed under: Blog Posts, Frustration, Individualism, Libertarians, Randomosity |
The above photograph is from my upcoming entry into Wild Zero’s Mustache Show. Want to know how this particular scene ends? Come to the show! Or…just go to my Flickr page. But come to the show anyway, and see tributes to the mustache.
A few days ago, I noticed a compatriot of mine on Facebook was attending some sort of function that advertised itself by trying to attract people who like to “think rationally.” The group - a
Wikipedia predictably as a good entry about rationality. Reading that, I again find myself struggling to believe that anybody makes irrational decisions. (Some) Economists limit the scope of the rationality that they explore, claiming that rational decisions are only the ones that maximize returns for the individual in pursuit of his or her stated goals.
The fun of philosophy is thinking backwards. Thus, the issue that I’ll claim to have isn’t with social scientific definition of rationality, but rather, the idea of an individual’s stated goals. I am taking this tactic from, amongst others, the (Some) Christians who claim that deeds matter far more than words, a position I’ll agree with. For the sake of this argument, let’s look at a heroin addict.
The social scientist looks at the heroin addict and says, “You’re making irrational decisions by using that heroin. Think of your goals, and dreams, and wishes! You’re not optimizing your life!” But of course, the problem with the heroin addict isn’t that he is making terribly irrational decisions; it’s that he’s making rational decisions toward what is obviously his actual goal: getting high out of his mind and appearing in the film Trainspotting.
Simply put, it seems likely impossible for a person to make irrational decisions toward their actual goals in life, as any decision made is the evidence of what goals are, and aren’t, actually important. For instance, I can say that this blog is of the utmost importance in my life, but I update it once, twice a week, tops? That ought to be evidence that perhaps my stated intentions aren’t my actual intentions. Social scientists don’t realize these sorts of things because they’re anxious to do what they can to predict the human experience, and having human beings incapable of even stating their simple goals completely undoes the work.
More to come, I suppose, but in summation: the notion that economists and free-marketeers are the only truly rational people is absurd folly.
Sam,
I am coming to agree more and more with your doubts about rationality. The question seems to linger around the question of time-preferences. Some people would rather enjoy the high-life now than a long life sober. The question of whether this is wise is subjective. It depends on an exogenous definition of wisdom and morality.
One thing that economics CAN tell us is that if everyone adopts a preference for the long run, and makes rational choices according to that norm, then everyone will be on the whole better off.
If you adopt the short run high life and I prefer the long run sober life, then I may perceive your wantonness as robbing me of the long run benefit of your activity. For you to live economically, you must trade with others to make them better off as well as yourself. By getting high and shortening your life span you reduce the number of transactions you will execute and society is so much the poorer.
I particular economicseese: you no longer generate positive externalities for me.
The question is: do I have any right to the externalities which you generate?
If not, then neither does anyone else have a right to the excess profits I collect through business acumen.
By the way, loved Trainspotting. Saw it in little five points, Atlanta. Perfect setting for that movie.