3 ms·
It's the result of politics, and that's not always pretty.
by pfdietz 4mo ago
It's the result of politics, and that's not always pretty.
- throwaway27448 4mo agoWhat isn't the result of politics? This is a bad explanation—how is there so little will to act in rational self interest?
- pfdietz 4mo agoEveryone, or at least almost everyone, acts according to personal interests. There's a whole branch of political science, Public Choice Theory, that deals with this. Where did you get this idea that altruism was common? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_choice https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_choice
- lazyasciiart 4mo agoHow did you get the idea they think anyone is being altruistic? Usually the complaint that people won’t vote in rational self interest is suggesting that people are voting based on irrational evaluations of their self interest: for the benefit of their unlikely future selves.
- pfdietz 4mo agoPublic choice theory explains why irrational collective results obtain from individual rational behavior. To get rational collective results requires that people act altruistically, favoring the collective over themselves.
- lazyasciiart 4mo agoAnd they are asking why it is so hard to get rational collective results, aka in your wording why is it so hard to get people to act altruistically. So the answer to your question “why do you think altruism is common* is still “what are you talking about”.
- pfdietz 3mo agoAltruism isn't common because we're created by evolution, and nothing is created by evolution without a selfish (for the genes) payoff. Supposed altruistic behavior in evolved creatures always has a selfish alterior motive (group selection, tit-for-tat payoff, for example).
- lazyasciiart 3mo agoSo the answer to your question "why do you think altruism is common" is still what are you talking about?
- stymaar 4mo agoPublic Choice theory is "a whole branch of political science" the same way "historic materialism" is though, with Buchanan instead of Marx, as it was created with the same kind of ideological motivations, with “state bad” instead of “capitalism bad” as the alpha and omega of the discipline. Interestingly enough, both shared the same contempt of democracy.