3 ms·
If I were to list a dozen behaviours, such as "gives to charity", "moves all income to offshore accounts to save taxes", etc, you would probably be able to sort
by IAmEveryone 5y ago
If I were to list a dozen behaviours, such as "gives to charity", "moves all income to offshore accounts to save taxes", etc, you would probably be able to sort them into "cooperative" and "selfish".
So those are well-defined categories. That one might just be a detour to the other doesn't seem to be relevant.
And, of course, the problem is that, far too often, fans of economic theory make the opposite mistake, and consider cooperative behaviour as a failure of rationality, when in reality they are just not thinking it through to the end.
- klipt 5y agoIt depends on what level you look at. Cooperation between individuals in a company could be for the selfish gain of the company. Cooperation between entities like companies can be for the selfish gain of even larger entities like nation states. Cooperation between nation states, e.g. members in the EU, can be for the selfish gain of the group, at the expense of states outside the group that get second class treatment.
- s1artibartfast 5y agoThis misses the point, as does the original article. In the economic framework, "selfishness" just whatever personal objective a person is optimizing for. Cooperation is tactic for achieving "selfish" goals, and not necessarily at odds. People donate to charity in the pursuit of what they personally value. I agree that some "fans of economics" make the mistake of viewing outcomes that don't increase a personal bank account as irrational. Well respected economic thinkers clearly understand that people have other goals in life. On the flip side, "critics of economics" make the opposite mistake, thinking that values in life besides maximizing your bank account are at odds with economic theory.