Bryan Caplan — Conspiracy Theory: The Hidden Agenda of the Political Mind

It's a book review, but it's value lies in summarizing how ideology trumps self-interest. Self-interest is too narrow a concept to account for human motivation, choice and action. Narrow utilitarianism is not sustained by evidence.

Does self-interest explain individuals' political views? Surprisingly, political science's standard answer is No. While self-interest occasionally plays a role, it poorly predicts both issue positions and voting behavior.

Unlike most economists, I strongly endorse political scientists' consensus. Their research doesn't just look solid. I've also personally played with the data for over a thousand hours, confirming that their basic approach is correct. When I teach this material, I make my graduate students hunt for counter-examples - exceptional cases where self-interest ishighly predictive of political views. Most return from this quest empty-handed, or nearly so. 

Jason Weedon and Robert Kurzban's new The Hidden Agenda of the Political Mind: How Self-Interest Shapes Our Opinions and Why We Won't Admit It (Princeton University Press, 2014) frontally attack the academic consensus against political self-interest. Since they charmingly paint me as a leading voice in this consensus, it is in my self-interest for their book to be widely-read. Unfortunately, Weedon and Kurzban are basically high-brow conspiracy theorists. They trumpet a strong, incredible thesis, then "interpret" virtually every fact to fit it...

Econlog
Conspiracy Theory: The Hidden Agenda of the Political Mind

Bryan Caplan | Professor of Economics, George Mason University

Daniel Little — Coleman on the elementary actor

Interesting post by Daniel Little on the difference between the way most sociologist view human action and most economists.

Here is how Coleman describes two basic approaches to sociology in "Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital" (link; 1988)."There are two broad intellectual streams in the description and explanation of social action. One, characteristic of the work of most sociologists, sees the actor as socialized and action as governed by social norms, rules, and obligations. The principal virtues of this intellectual stream lie in its ability to describe action in social context and to explain the way action is shaped, constrained, and redirected by the social context.  The other intellectual stream, characteristic of the work of most economists, sees the actor as having goals independently arrived at, as acting independently, and as wholly self-interested. Its principal virtue lies in having a principle of action, that of maximizing utility. This principle of action, together with a single empirical generalization (declining marginal utility) has generated growth of neoclassical economic theory, as well as the growth of political philosophy of several varieties: utilitarianism, contractarianism, and natural rights. (S95)" [emphasis added]

Read it at Understanding Society
Coleman on the elementary actor
by Daniel Little