should individuals not optimize cost/yield for their reputation when they cooperate? doing the wrong good can hurt reputation
-
-
Replying to @Plinz
Yes. They should consider some things. Eg the benefits to others. But we don't like when they consider costs/benefits to themselves.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Moshe_Hoffman
what if primary cost/benefit is not material but reputation itself?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Plinz
yup. Even then. I think we r more trustworthy if we don't condition our good deeds on, eg whether we r being watched.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Moshe_Hoffman
but if you cooperate with people or do good things i don't like it lowers your reputation in my eyes!
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Plinz
sure. But that's a completely unrelated phenomena. We r talking bout behaviors that r agreed to be prosocial.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Moshe_Hoffman
prosociality depends on the particular group value context, no?
4 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Plinz
no. Prosociality, I would define, as just sacrificing your own welfare to improve others welfare. Norm compliance may be different.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Moshe_Hoffman
if I would mprove your welfare by giving you my prescription medicine, my reputation is affected depending on local norms
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Plinz
sure. No one is questioning that there might be norms that prescribe against u doing something altruistic towards me.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
normviolating actions will not count as altruistic in the eyes of the normhavers
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.