“SOVEREIGN in tastes, steely-eyed and point-on in perception of risk, and relentless in maximisation of happiness.” This was Daniel McFadden’s memorable summation, in 2006, of the idea of Everyman held by economists. That this description is unlike any real person was Mr McFadden’s point. The Nobel prizewinning economist at the University of California, Berkeley, wryly termed homo economicus “a rare species”. In his latest paper he outlines a “New Science of Pleasure”, in which he argues that economics should draw much more heavily on fields such as psychology, neuroscience and anthropology. He wants economists to accept that evidence from other disciplines does not just explain those bits of behaviour that do not fit the standard models. Rather, what economists consider anomalous is the norm. Homo economicus, not his fallible counterpart, is the oddity.
or if this has already captured your interst, go ahead and read McFadden’s new article, “The New Science of Pleasure“
- “Networked minds” require a fundamentally new kind of economics (rwer.wordpress.com)
- Biological Evolution of Friendliness as Possible Basis for Networked Economy (p2pfoundation.net)
- Manuel A. Vasquez’s response to: “The Homo Economicus and transnational religious networks in a post-secular society”. (religionfactor.net)
- “Networked Minds” Require A Fundamentally New Kind of Economics (videolectures.net)
- A day in the life of a behavioural economist (worthwhile.typepad.com)