Rand vs. Evolutionary Psychology - Norms promoting tolerance and honesty

Bryan Caplan at EconLog wrote something worth reading.

Image via Wikipedia

Rand vs. Evolutionary Psychology: Part 2, Bryan Caplan | EconLog | Library of Economics and Liberty: "If Rand really wanted to build an individualist sub-culture, she would have done so in an evolutionarily informed way. If people naturally care about the opinions of others, jumping on people is a good way to get dishonest conformity, but a bad way to get an honest exchange of ideas. Instead, an individualist sub-culture must be built upon tolerance and honesty. I'd suggest three key norms:

1. Don't think less of people who sincerely disagree.

2. Do think less of people who insincerely agree.

3. Do think less of people who think less of people who sincerely disagree.

I don't claim that these norms are easy. It's tough for humans to follow them perfectly. But they're do-able - and given human nature, they're self-reinforcing. In fact, these guidelines are pillars of the legendary GMU lunch. Our tradition is now in its thirteenth year, and I'm proud to say that unlike the Objectivists, we've never purged a member."

Image via Wikipedia

People moan about overcoming bias - but the unstated is that they bemoan the bias in other people. Disciplines that actually allow one to shed personal bias are very uninteresting to most people. The disciplines that actually allow an individual to shed his own biases are practically the only interesting things in the world.

The Rational and Irrational in Politics: Gaining and Holding Power

Bryan Caplan on the idea of "Totalitarian Political Entrepreneurship". http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2009/07/sorel_on_totali.html

The premise: While guys like Lenin, Hitler, and Mao were hopelessly deluded about many things, their beliefs about how to win and hold power were probably correct. After all, these totalitarian political entrepreneurs managed to pull themselves from obscurity to absolute power - no easy feat.

Good comment by Edgardo E. Barandiaran:

Bryan,

Image by zoomar via Flickr

Perhaps you should distinguish between winning power and holding power. A politician can succeed in winning power by promising irrational policies (Obama is just the latest example). It is much harder to succeed in holding power by implementing irrational policies--you can do it as, for example, Mao did it in China (the only measure of success in holding power is to die of natural causes while still in power--if you have any doubts about this point, talk to Gordon). To illustrate my point of how difficult is to hold power by implementing irrational policies, I suggest that you look at the experience of Argentina since Peron was first elected president (February 1946). There have been presidents that won the position just by default (they were "elected" or "appointed" because any of the strong man could not defeat the other strong men) and others that succeeded to win power promising irrational policies (Alfonsin, Menem, the Kirchners) but had a hard time holding power. Read this application of some of Mancur Olson's ideas to the current situation of Ms. Kirchner (published today in La Nacion)

Cover via Amazon

http://www.lanacion.com.ar/nota.asp?nota_id=1157009&pid=6991666&toi=6261 [In Spanish - applying Mancur Olson's idea of roving thieves and stationary bandits from Power and Prosperity, nice write-up http://www.fff.org/freedom/0900h.asp ]

I am very hesitant to use the term "irrational" to describe the actions of others. Living your life using a rough model of the germ theory of disease is Rational. Not doing so is Irrational. Beyond that, I find those terms too prejudicial for reasoned analysis of other's actions. I would prefer to talk about "actions leading to winning power" and "actions consistent with holding power until natural death". Or, in the case of United States Presidents "actions consistent with holding power for two terms and commanding respect and notoriety and large speaking fees until natural death".

Image by [ r ♥ c e y t ♥ y ] {I br♥ke for bokeh} via Flickr

Obama seems incapable of making the same mistake twice. You can go far with only this skill, in politics, if you have some reserve of good will. Obama will veer to the right to hold on to power, reflexively. To the disgust of progressives, and to the delight of some, and the apathy of the rest.

Hey! just realized how much of my happiness is under my control!

Thank you, Plinky. Instead of constructing the perfect day from start to finish, I just imagined plopping my head down on the pillow, and what would put my mind at ease before I saw logs. And it brought into focus that all this stuff is under my control. Which is a good feeling!

Image via Wikipedia

Laffs

A very nice way to end the day is being silly with a silly wife and a silly daughter. The economist Bryan Caplan makes the case for less emphasis on trying to change or mold your children, and more emphasis on enjoying the company of your children. Goes without saying that this is fine advice for your spouse as well. It is very nice to share a little house with such interesting people. I don't mind the teasing.

Image by pcgn7 via Flickr

walk the dog, exercise

I feel much better about myself after I walk the dog, and exercise on the stationary bike. Much better than walking the bike and exercise on the stationary dog (?).

lost some pounds

Image via Wikipedia

Seeing that I gained a few pounds can be a real downer. My liver does not need to be any fattier. I am not fattening myself up for Hannibal Lecter to enjoy.

Good news and Bad news on Parenting, from Bryan Caplan

Bryan Caplan in The Chronicle of Higher Education.

Many of us worry that our nation will pay a heavy price in years to come because modern parents are shirking their responsibilities to the next generation. If you combine the results from time diaries and behavioral genetics, however, you get a different picture. It turns out that there is some really good news and some mildly bad news. The really good news is that we can stop worrying about the horrible fate of the next generation. The bad news is that parents today are making large "investments" in their children that are unlikely to pay off.

My comment:

I will remind myself to teach my daughter the tools to achieve her own goals, per her own morality, any present my morality only through my example.