January 13th, 2020 | 39 mins
books, cass sunstein, choice architecture, civic law, civic norms, common’s dilemma, cooperation, cultural change, dictator game, economic games, economics, emotions, ethics, experimental philosophy, fairness, formal logic, friedrich von hayek, game theory, happiness, john rawls, keynesian economics, meaning, milton friedman, moral psychology, neoliberalism, nudging, philosophy, prisoner’s dilemma, psycholinguistics, psychology, public policy, purpose, rational choice theory, reason, reasoning, richard thaler, self-interest, sharing, social psychology, social science, taxes, tv sitcoms, utility maximization, well being, wisdom
Are people being reasonable when they act irrationally? Doesn’t rationality and reasonableness mean the same thing? Charles and Igor kick of the new decade by diving into a messy mix of behavioral economics, nudges, moral philosophy and legal studies, to examine what standards guide people’s decisions. Charles asks Igor about core standards that guide people when they try to make a good decision. Igor unpacks how the standard of a rational agent evolved in the 20th century and what implications it has had for modern economics and politics. Charles wonders if there are any reasonable people left on the Clapham omnibus in London. Igor discusses his new work assessing how most people define rationality and reasonableness, showing that irrational behavior may be a consequence of focusing on reasonableness instead. Welcome to Episode 24.