Alternative to Homo Economicus

Free access to scriptures religious leaders try to censor

I wonder why no body is mentioning evolutionary psychology.

I think the most important and yet accurate theory that predict humans’ behavior beyond homo economicus is evolutionary psychology.

Compared to evolutionary psychology, homo economicus, are like counting pennies that would work only on aspects of life that do not really decide reproductive success, **and hence not really motivational**, such as money in western world.

Most people in western civilization believe that killing people for money is not worth it. No amount of money is worth killing for said a cop to me. Yet people kill each other over arguments.

Yap. That’s a surprising conclusion from evolutionary psychology which I would explain latter.

I think most of the time economists only analyze normal consensual behavior and probably extend that a little to some non consensual aspect, like corruption. It doesn’t explain where does morality comes from, for example. Everything else is uncharted water.

Evolutionary psychology can link morality to the interest of those who made up morality, namely those who are in power. Almost nothing is uncharted water in evolutionary psychology.

Satoshi Kanazawa claimed that evolutionary psychology to humans’ nature is like particle physics for physicist. It’s so fundamental you can explain everything (though not very efficiently).

> I will conclude this post with another favorite quote of mine from Weinberg.
>     The reason we give the impression that we think that elementary particle physics is more fundamental than other branches of physics is
> because it is.
> The reason we give the impression that we think that evolutionary
> psychology is more fundamental than other branches of social and
> behavioral sciences is because it is.

Effectively, social sciences is a branch of biology. Simple right?

Homo economicus says that humans max out profit. What is profit? It’s what we maximize. What do we maximize? Profit. What is profit again? What we maximize. So what are we maximizing? Whatever we want? What do we want? Profit? What is profit? Ugggh…. Not really telling much here.

We then jump to a false conclusion that profit mainly means money. Then we are baffled of why anyone would bother committing suicide bombing just for a religion. We also wonder if religion is really the issue, why those who bomb bali, for example, would bomb hedonist tourists rather than jails full of sinners.

Evolutionary psychology explain that very clearly. For any human behavior that significantly affect a person’s reproductive success, we would expect evolutionary psychology to work far better than any economic theories.

In fact, the issue why terrorists become terrorists are the same issue why we prohibit prostitution and polygamy. It’s the same issue behind antisemitism and large number of pogroms against richer and more affluent minorities. They are all trying to prevent inter species competitors from reproducing.

Obviously the more competitive the competitor is, the more people want to kill them, and that’s why hedonist tourists are the target.

Humans are not rational. But they still behave as if they are rational with unexpected goals, namely the same goals all living things have, reproduce.

The result is extremely accurate but politically incorrect, and hence not mainstream. Some of the result is here:

Many of the conclusions can be used to predict not only economy but politic, religions, prevailing norms, and anything influential about life.

For example, most evolutionary psychologist would agree that polygamy is prohibited mainly to protect **men** rather than women. Yap surprising isn’t it?

Obviously this will work and only work in democratic countries where large number of single males can vote. So we can predict that anti polygamy laws will correlate highly with democracy.

We do.

Not that I am advocating polygamy. I hate marriage. Just want to point out how accurate evolutionary psychology is. Of course, nowadays, most people have sex outside marriage anyway and anti polygamy laws are no longer that effective for that purpose. Marriage is in decline. Many males don’t get laid.

Normal economy theory will not tell us why most cultures allow forced marriage but disallow women trafficking. I mean the former is non consensual, effectively rape. The latter is often consensual. Also how can we protect people from their own consent anyway?

If everyone is rationally maxing out their profit, prohibition of consensual acts, unless on extreme circumstances will tend to hurt the consenting party.

Evolutionary psychology will explain that easily. Everyone still max out their profit including forced married women and “victim” of women trafficking. Women prefer the rich and it’s very normal that women in poor countries want to marry (or in anyway sell) their sexual talent to richer men in rich countries. Obviously this gives women in richer countries competition. And that’s the real reason why women trafficking is politically incorrect or illegal. There are many lonely ugly feminists in rich countries that do not want cheaper younger competitors from other places.

Yap everyone still maxs out their profit. It’ll be naive to think that people would go all the way trying to protect us from our consent. A much more likely explanation is that it’s just common robbery sugar coated as guidance.

We can predict then that forced marriage is common in poor countries where the males are not rich enough to attract women. We can also predict that main opponents of women trafficking are unattractive women in rich countries that will end up becoming singles if trafficking or international marriage has become too common.

All those are disprovable testable conclusions we can all verify.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.