Press "Enter" to skip to content

Economics – Psychology’s Neglected Branch

“It is impossible to identify any human action if one does not pertain to the meaning the actor sees in the stimulus as well as in the end on how he responds is aiming at. ” –Ludwig von Mises

Economics – to the great sorrow of economists – is merely a branch of psychology. It handles specific behaviour and with mass behaviour. Many of their practitioners sought to bluff its nature as a social science by making use of complex mathematics where common sense and direct testing would have yielded much better results. myeconlab

The end result has been an uncomfortable divorce between monetary theory and its subjects.

The economical actor is thought to be constantly interested in the rational mission for self interest. This kind of is not an traditional model – merely an useful approximation. According to the latter day – logical – version of the dismal science, people keep from repeating their mistakes methodically. They seek to enhance their preferences. Altruism can be such an inclination, as well. 

Still, many people are non-rational or only practically rational in certain situations. And the meaning of “self-interest” as the quest for the fulfillment of preferences is a tautology.

The idea fails to predict important phenomena such as “strong reciprocity” – the inclination to “irrationally” sacrifice resources to reward forthcoming collaborators and punish free-riders. This even does not accounts for simpler kinds of obvious selflessness, such as testing altruism (motivated by expectations of reciprocal benevolent treatment in the future).

However, authoritative and mainstream 95 “Handbook of Experimental Economics”, by John Hagel and Alvin Roth (eds. ) admits that folks do not behave in accordance with the predictions of basic economical theories, including the standard theory of utility and the theory of basic equilibrium. Irritatingly for economic analysts, people change their choices mysteriously and irrationally. This kind of is called “preference reversals”.

Moreover, people’s preferences, as evidenced by their alternatives and decisions in carefully manipulated experiments, are sporadic. They have a propensity to lose control of their actions or waste time because they place better importance (i. e., increased “weight”) on the present and the near future than on the even future. This makes most people both irrational and unpredictable.

Both cannot design an experiment to carefully and validly test theorems and conjectures in economics – or something is very flawed with the intellectual pillars and models of this field.

Neo-classical economics has failed on several fronts simultaneously. This kind of multiple failure led to despair and the re-examination of basic precepts and tenets.

Think about this sample of outstanding issues:

Unlike other economical actors and providers, governments are accorded a special status and acquire special treatment in economical theory. Government is also consider cast as a contemporary, seeking to selflessly take full advantage of social welfare – or as the villain, aiming to perpetuate and increase it is power ruthlessly, as every public choice theories.

The two views are caricatures of reality. Governments indeed seek to perpetuate their power and increase it – nonetheless they do it mostly in order to redistribute income and rarely for self-enrichment.

Comments are closed.