Daniel Kuehn Sides with Socrates and Plato; Unfortunately, Aristotle Was Right

By -
Here:
Nobody who genuinely understands the time inconsistency problem is ever going to be in a position where in the short-run they want something that is inconsistent in the long-run, because anybody who genuinely understands the time inconsistency problem (or really any number of other “unintended consequences” type problems like it) is going to knowingly cut off their nose to spite their face like that.
This was the position adopted Socrates and Plato: "No one goes willingly toward the bad." But it is wrong. It fails to account for akrasia: weakness of the will. I can testify with certainty that, for an entire month, while perfectly aware that I was engaging in hyperbolic discounting, I still night after night failed to unfold the sofa bed upon which I was to sleep because it seemed like to much trouble that night.

Comments

  1. Anonymous8:32 PM

    Did you brush your teeth?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. gcallah9:31 PM

      Yeah, things didn't get that bad.

      Delete
    2. Anonymous5:03 PM

      Forgive me for assuming, but what you described is typically behavior that I have observed in myself during a bender, so I was reading into it from my own perspective of such. However, in such a case, I could sleep on a pile of rocks and wouldn't care a bit.

      Delete
    3. gcallah1:34 PM

      Joe, I'm capable of hyperbolic discounting even when not on a bender.

      Delete
  2. Daniel8:23 AM

    I think "understand" was the wrong word.

    Read the rest of the discussion, I'm really not saying that. If people are demanding that we deal with the time inconsistency problem, say, by demanding that we follow a rule - it's clearly what they "want" or "like" to do because they are working off of a very different utility function than the one that results in dynamic inconsistency.

    If you tell yourself "I really need to open this bed" and you begin the process of opening the bed you are genuinely inculcating the time inconsistency problem and you are doing it BECAUSE it is something that benefits you.

    Can someone offer an instance where you would open the bed because you know it's something that would be bad for you?

    No?

    Then I stand by what I said.

    Of course you may not actually do it in any given night, but that's why I'm on the "rules" side of the "rules vs. discretion" discussion.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Libertarians, My Libertarians!

By -
Cruel to be kind means that I love you . Because, while I think you are mistaken, your hearts are in the right place -- yes, even you, Silas --  unlike some people . This Breitbart fellow (discussed in the link above), by all appearances, deliberately doctored a video of Shirley Sherrod to make her remarks appear virulently racist, when they had, in fact, the opposite import. I heard that at a recent Austrian conference, some folks were talking about "Callahan's conservative turn." While that description is not entirely inaccurate, I must say that a lot of these people who today call themselves conservative give me the heebie-jeebies.
Read more

"Pre-Galilean" Foolishness

By -
 I am currently reading The Master and His Emissary , which appears to be an excellent book. ("Appears" because I don't know the neuroscience literature well enough to say for sure, yet.) But then on page 186 I find: "Asking cognition, however, to give a perspective on the relationship between cognition and affect is like asking astronomer in the pre-Galilean geocentric world, whether, in his opinion, the sun moves round the earth of the earth around the sun. To ask a question alone would be enough to label one as mad." OK, this is garbage. First of all, it should be pre-Copernican, not pre-Galilean. But much worse is that people have seriously been considering heliocentrism for many centuries before Copernicus. Aristarchus had proposed a heliocentric model in the 4th-century BC. It had generally been considered wrong, but not "mad." (And wrong for scientific reasons: Why, for instance, did we not observe stellar parallax?) And when Copernicus propose
Read more