Nice post @jaredhowe : ) I can't agree with you though... Your argument assumes we're rational actors. But humans aren't rational, they are incredibly irrational. I'm not sure you can judge someone based on their actions, because actions are so easily manipulated.
Let's take your example of spending 5 bucks. If it's Ok with you we'll say our case study picked up a piece of crap plastic toy at the counter of a big supermarket. ..
Did they spend the money on that toy because they valued it more than any other thing they could have spent that money on? I doubt it.
I doubt they valued it more than other things in that very supermarket. In my opinion it's more likely that spent it because humans are stupid and it was there, brightly coloured and a sign told them it was discounted by 75% and lots of people are motivated to buy when they "find a bargain".
Supermarkets put things like this at the till because they know people are easily manipulated, not because they genuinely believe that these products will be chosen by people who can see that they are worth more than other items in the shop.
What do you think?
As an aside, I haven't seen any Socialists say they don't believe "that internet-connected devices and human hands aren't means of production/production capital", could you point me towards where I can read that argument? It seems obviously stupid to me, and I'd like to try to find out why anyone would think that!
Your definition of "rational" assumes value is objective. But value is subjective, and any choice I make is rational because it's my preference.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Your subjective perceptions are filtered to a chain of reasoning that may be rational or irrational to arrive at a choice. Whether the choice is rational or not depends upon how you reasoned from your perceptions.
By your definition nothing is ever irrational.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
You're using "rational" in a different way than @Geke. You're talking about judging whether an action is rational ex post facto; Geke is talking about the process of selecting multiple available means for the attainment of some subjectively preferred ends being a rational process in and of itself. Whether or not the means chosen result in ends intended does not change the fact that the process by which the means were chosen was itself rational.
This is not to say that people don't hold irrational beliefs or that their irrational beliefs don't affect the rational process of choosing means in the attainment of some preferred ends.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Exactly, and yes @dantheman, according to my definition, people never act irrationally. Which was my original point in response to @freewill. People almost never act irrationally because they always act in their own self-perceived best interest. (Almost always, with a few weird exceptions.)
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
My argument assumes that the process of choosing from among various scarce means in the achievement of some subjectively preferred end is itself a rational process regardless of the skill of an individual in assessing the likelihood that the chosen means actually WILL achieve said ends. I'm not sure what judging someone would even mean; I'm only using logic to determine their actual values and demonstrated preferences. Action is an expression of preference even under the influence of compulsion.
It's not a case study. It's a hypothetical situation. What information does your doubt rely upon? If they had a more valuable use for that five dollars, like buying something or saving it, why didn't they put it toward that use?
Doesn't the suggestion that people can't resist marketing assume lack of free will and moral agency? How does the fact that their decision was influenced by external factors change the fact that they made a decision?
I'm sure one or two socialists will pop up in the comments of this article to contest the idea that internet connected devices are means of production provided the environment here isn't too vitriolic. I don't know how comfortable I'd feel commenting knowing I was going to be called stupid if I were in their position.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
Hi Jared... you ask "Doesn't the suggestion that people can't resist marketing assume lack of free will and moral agency? How does the fact that their decision was influenced by external factors change the fact that they made a decision?"
I address this here:
https://steemit.com/philosophy/@freewill/freewill-on-free-will-and-accountability-a-demand-for-more-and-compassion-from-kevinwong
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit