3 ms·

That’s the problem with homo economicus, the rational choice agent that makes economists swoon but is not so easy to find in reality. People have many reasons w

That’s the problem with homo economicus, the rational choice agent that makes economists swoon but is not so easy to find in reality. People have many reasons why they do what they do and sometimes they don’t understand their own motivations.

paulcole 3y ago
> People have many reasons why they do what they do and sometimes they don’t understand their own motivations. So we’re in agreement here right? That people are doing things themselves. Others are not forcing their actions. Regardless of whether people consciously understand the reasoning behind their actions, their actions are still their own.
- shermantanktop 3y ago
  That’s where I think it gets complicated. At a physical level, yes, of course. But at the psychological or moral level, it’s murkier. People can be coerced, manipulated, or just plain drugged, and in a legal setting we would consider those to reduce culpability.
  - paulcole 3y ago
    You do make a fair point that makes me reconsider this more. However I think drugging someone is where you edge away from the concept of motivation into something else. But then it’s like is giving me a sulfonylurea motivating my pancreas to release a bit more insulin? Kind of, I think? Maybe if you’re doing something that produces an involuntary and uncontrollable physical reaction, you can’t describe that as motivation? I’m not set on that though.
    - shermantanktop 3y ago
      Setting aside drugs… Sophisticated methods of coercive manipulation involve the coercing party looking at all the choices and options available to the target, and systematically removing or undermining all but the preferred option. Dark patterns in UX, legally dubious arbitration dispute clauses in consumer contracts, push polling, etc. At that point, the target is still free to choose, but the options they choose from are stacked. They can still choose a non-optimal choice but probably won’t.

paulcole 3y ago

> People have many reasons why they do what they do and sometimes they don’t understand their own motivations. So we’re in agreement here right? That people are doing things themselves. Others are not forcing their actions. Regardless of whether people consciously understand the reasoning behind their actions, their actions are still their own.

shermantanktop 3y ago
That’s where I think it gets complicated. At a physical level, yes, of course. But at the psychological or moral level, it’s murkier. People can be coerced, manipulated, or just plain drugged, and in a legal setting we would consider those to reduce culpability.
- paulcole 3y ago
  You do make a fair point that makes me reconsider this more. However I think drugging someone is where you edge away from the concept of motivation into something else. But then it’s like is giving me a sulfonylurea motivating my pancreas to release a bit more insulin? Kind of, I think? Maybe if you’re doing something that produces an involuntary and uncontrollable physical reaction, you can’t describe that as motivation? I’m not set on that though.
  - shermantanktop 3y ago
    Setting aside drugs… Sophisticated methods of coercive manipulation involve the coercing party looking at all the choices and options available to the target, and systematically removing or undermining all but the preferred option. Dark patterns in UX, legally dubious arbitration dispute clauses in consumer contracts, push polling, etc. At that point, the target is still free to choose, but the options they choose from are stacked. They can still choose a non-optimal choice but probably won’t.