My great grandfather used to say "where there is money there is larceny". I find that statement really interesting for two reasons. The first is because of who my grandfather was historically, half German Navajo who grew up on a reservation and moved to Chicago at a time when a lot of Germans were anarchist. And secondly because it is true.
One of my basic philosophies in life is that there really isn't good and evil people, no such thing as willpower, there are just people with varying priorities. One of the reasons for this blog is to get me to put these ideas up where they can be challenged. But it looks like this one won't be challenged by many economists. Or at least the ones that authored Freakonomics (for full disclosure I have watched the movie not read the book).
I've had this idea for a while and have always used the word priorities to describe what motivates people. They use the word intensives. The reason for this is also why I won't adopt their phrase. Thinking about intensives is more helpful if you are trying to think about how to find solutions for behavior. Priorities is more useful if you are trying to understand the complexity of people.
Here is an an example that has gotten me into trouble before: Addiction is not a disease, and someone who says they can't quit, just doesn't want to badly enough. Now an economist might agree saying that the addict's intensive is to get high not to keep their economic/social well being. This would be pretty close to the definition used by Dr. Drew (of Loveline and Celebrity Rehab fame) and other addiction specialists.
Looking at the problem as just one of many priorities of the individual, not only puts responsibility on the one person who can solve the problem, and it highlights what is really at risk. Looking at actions as symptoms of priorities can be used to look at the behavior of government and corporate America without engaging in conspiracy theories.
No comments:
Post a Comment