Tuesday, October 11, 2016

The Toxic Definition of Rational Self Interest


Hillary Clinton's expensive Speech Transcripts are out now despite her best efforts. Summary : 'It's important to lie to the public but I'd never lie to YOU, Wall Street.' 

So, basically what pretty much everyone already knew.

It was novel to read words she's said and find myself willing to believe she was sincere, she was paid quite well for her honesty after all.

Trump, meanwhile, said horrible things in the past as well as the present and is likewise an embarrassment to the nation. I hardly doubt that he too has "...a public and a private position."

To back away from all that gradually, like one might from a startled rattlesnake, let me segue into the sort of narcissistic madness/idiocy that has led to this mess and has become ENTIRELY too commonplace in the ruling elite of that country and some others- not to mention among my own personal detractors.

If you were to ask any of these fools what drives them they might in a rare moment of candor say Rational Self Interest. The 'rational' part is what makes it good and wholesome you see. This is a term I hear far too often in studies such as this one below which shall serve as the basis for my tirade.

Rational self interest is all too often defined as 'what gets me, personally, more things' and here there is no exception.

I cannot understand how these people can take any pride in their own intellect when 'People resent being taken advantage.' can be implied to be irrational. 

According to 'Rational Self Interest' people should be HAPPY to take even the most trivial of shares because it's technically more than they had before- just like it's perfectly rational and good to take as much of the money for yourself as you can get away with.

It's a farce!

This definition of rational self interest operates on the objectivist conceit that the only thing of value involved is the money. THIS is why the results, apparently, regularly baffle them.

But it is quite plainly false. Humans are social creatures, we have evolved to- in varying degrees- cooperate and work with each other. To do this in a manner that benefits us individually there is an intrinsic value in encouraging fairness and punishing the abusive in order to weave a social fabric that will support everyone as close to equally as possible and thus ourselves.

So, when in The Ultimatum Game someone rejects an offensive offer they are not simply throwing away money, they are stressing that the intangible concept of fairness or justice is worth considerably more than the money on offer. They are making a very rational purchase for themselves indeed.

If any player is failing to heed actual rational self interest, it is the player taking or trying to take a Lion's share of the money. That shows they are failing to consider on any level that they will not always be the one making the offer. They are calling it moral behavior in the video above- but I would say it is not simply moral but indeed quite rational.

Ah, I seem to be approaching the rattlesnake again. So be it.

Have a higher-quality Presidential Debate.

No comments:

Post a Comment