To say "utility comes from... genes" is to attempt to ground economics in biology. But economics is explicitly *not* grounded on biology -- which is the whole point of this Trivers' talk. https://twitter.com/UtilaTheEcon/status/1121181648085667840 …
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
-
-
-
-
Replying to @LoCtrl
Perhaps, but I don't see the relevance. It's supposed to be a descriptive theory of intentional action (human or otherwise).
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @metapotat
It's quite fine as a theory by itself. The problem is that the entire "raison d'etre" of that theory is to define a measure that could be maximized.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Let me rephrase: that's not how it always gets used now. Your quarrel seems to be with crude utilitarians, not economists. (Which often overlap, I know)
9:31 PM - 24 Apr 2019
1 reply
0 retweets
1 like
-
-
-
Replying to @LoCtrl
I was under the impression that what was at stake was the theoretical grounding of econ, not how it gets misused. This is a few steps back from the Trivers clip.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes - 1 more reply
New conversation -
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.