Challenging Economic Literacy: Egoism/Altruism In Behavioral Economics

Since a communication system is of no value unless there is a critical mass of users, how can we educate more people to work through their unconscious resistance of economic literacy? Constructively critical thinking of economics, as it relates to egoism and altruism isn’t easy. This involves a great deal of introspection and even then, it’s an extremely difficult job. One doesn’t usually have proper insight into ones own emotional makeup regarding our economic choices. Most of us spend our time trying to rationalize our behavior as a result of our lack of self awareness.

In the vast expanse of human history, critical thinkers share a tapestry woven with threads of ambition, revolution, and the relentless pursuit of truth. Within this intricate web of existence, the seeds of behavioral economics were sown, nurtured by the fertile soil of curiosity and skepticism. The French Revolution stands as a testament to the power of collective action and the indomitable spirit of humanity. As the guillotine's blade fell upon the necks of tyrants and oppressors, a wave of liberation swept across the land, echoing through the ages and inspiring future generations to challenge the status quo.

Yet, amidst the chaos and upheaval of revolution, a curious paradox emerged—a realization that the world was neither just nor fair, but rather a chaotic dance of chance and circumstance. The fallacy of a just world crumbled like sandcastles before the tide, revealing the harsh realities of wealth inequality and systemic injustice that had plagued society for centuries.
It was in this crucible of upheaval and uncertainty that the seeds of behavioral economics found fertile ground to take root and flourish. Scholars and thinkers, inspired by the tumultuous events unfolding around them, sought to understand the complexities of human behavior and decision-making in the face of adversity.

Drawing upon insights from psychology, sociology, and economics, these intrepid pioneers embarked on a journey to unravel the mysteries of the human mind and explore the irrationalities that lurked beneath the surface of rational economic theory. They challenged the prevailing orthodoxy of homo economicus, the rational actor driven solely by self-interest, and dared to explore the nuances of human behavior in all its complexity.

Through experiments and observations, they uncovered the hidden biases and cognitive shortcuts that influenced our decisions, revealing the flawed assumptions that underpinned traditional economic models. They showed how our perceptions of fairness and justice were often shaped by subjective interpretations and societal norms, rather than objective reality.
And so, the saga of behavioral economics unfolded, a tale of hope and disillusionment, optimism tempered by nihilism. For in the relentless pursuit of truth, we confront the uncomfortable reality that the world is a chaotic and unpredictable place, governed not by divine justice or cosmic order, but by the capricious whims of fate.

Yet, amidst the chaos and uncertainty, lies a glimmer of hope—a recognition that while we may never fully grasp the intricacies of human behavior, we can strive to create a more just and equitable world. We can challenge the fallacy of a just world and confront the inequalities that plague our society, not with resignation or despair, but with determination and resilience.

In the United States, economics emerged as a recognized academic discipline in the latter half of the 19th century, with the establishment of economics departments at universities such as Harvard and Yale. By the early 20th century, economics had become a common major offered by many colleges and universities across the country. The roots of behavioral economics can be traced back to the mid-20th century, with early contributions from scholars such as Herbert Simon, Daniel Kahneman, and Amos Tversky. However, it wasn't until the late 20th century and early 21st century that behavioral economics gained widespread recognition and became integrated into academic curricula at many colleges and universities.

One of the earliest studies to use the board game Monopoly to highlight wealth inequality in the context of behavioral economics was conducted by Mary Ann Glynn and David R. Kelsey at Purdue University in the early 1990s. In their study, titled "Monopoly Money": Effects of Income Disparity on Buying Behavior," Glynn and Kelsey examined how participants' starting wealth in a game of Monopoly influenced their behavior and perceptions of fairness. They manipulated the initial wealth of players to create unequal starting conditions and observed how this affected their purchasing behavior and attitudes towards fairness throughout the game.

There is another “Monopoly” study conducted by the researchers at the University of California, Berkeley, where one player starts with more wealth than the other, simulating wealth inequality. What emerged from subsequent players' explanations for their success was a pattern of attributing their victory to personal skill or strategy rather than acknowledging the initial advantage given to them. This phenomenon is known as the "just-world hypothesis," where individuals tend to believe that the world is inherently fair and that people get what they deserve, even when evidence suggests otherwise.

For a critical mass of people to reject capitalism in favor of a more equitable version, several conditions would likely need to be met. Firstly, there would need to be widespread recognition of the systemic inequalities perpetuated by capitalism and a desire for more equitable distribution of resources and opportunities. This would require education, awareness, and grassroots movements advocating for change. Additionally, viable alternatives to capitalism would need to be developed and implemented, addressing both economic and social concerns. Finally, political will and leadership would be crucial in enacting policies that promote fairness, sustainability, and social justice. Overall, achieving a shift away from capitalism would require a significant reimagining of economic and social systems, as well as a collective effort to prioritize equity and sustainability.

Capitalism often emphasizes individual self-interest and pursuit of personal success. These values can sometimes overshadow moral concerns, leading individuals to prioritize incentives within the existing system. Over time, individuals may become desensitized to the existing inequalities generated by capitalism. If economic disparities become normalized, people may not perceive them as inherently immoral but rather as a natural outcome of the system.

Some individuals may not fully grasp the ethical implications of certain economic systems, or they may not be aware of alternative models that prioritize morality. Education and awareness play a crucial role in shaping perspectives on these issues. Humans are often influenced by cognitive biases, such as the status quo bias or the belief in a just world, which can hinder our willingness to challenge existing systems, even when faced with evidence of moral shortcomings. People may resist prioritizing morality over incentives if they perceive it as conflicting with their political or ideological beliefs. How can we foster a broader societal dialogue about the ethical implications of economic systems, promoting education on alternative models, and encouraging incentives and morality within a capitalist framework? How can we manifest more thoughtful and nuanced discussions that consider both individual and collective well-being?

In a media world where ideologies clash like titans in a cosmic arena of bias confirming studies, there exists a mental prison in all of us, a place where the fabric of reality seemed to twist and bend at the whims of fate. Within this peculiar prison, three figures find themselves entwined in a narrative woven with threads of wealth, power, and morality.

In the heart of Uruguay, amidst the rolling hills and endless plains, lives a man named Jose Mujica. His presence is as humble as the earth he trod upon, his spirit as resilient as the wind that caresses its fields. Though possessing little in the way of material wealth, his wealth of character and altruism knows no bounds. He lives simply, devoting his life to the service of others, embodying the virtues of compassion and selflessness.

On the distant shores of the United States, stands a man of starkly contrasting nature. Donald Trump, a name that is synonymous with wealth and influence, a man whose ego towers over skyscrapers and whose ambitions reaches beyond the stars. His existence is a testament to the allure of power and the seduction of self-interest. Yet, beneath the façade of opulence lay a soul consumed by greed and hubris, a prisoner of his own desires.

In the midst of these two opposing forces, stands a figure of lesser renown, yet no less significant in the grand tapestry of fate. Jose Franco, a small business owner from Brooklyn, harbors within him a spark of rebellion, a flicker of defiance against the status quo. Unlike Mujica and Trump, his wealth is modest, his influence limited, but his ideals burned brightly in the darkness of uncertainty.

As the wheels of destiny continue to turn, these three souls find themselves ensnared within the confines of this mysterious prison. Each cell bares the imprint of its occupant's essence, reflecting their beliefs, desires, and fears.

Mujica's cell is a sanctuary of simplicity, adorned with only the bare necessities of existence. Despite the confines of his imprisonment, he remains steadfast in his convictions, finding solace in meditation and reflection. His letters, penned with love and hope, carries the promise of a brighter tomorrow, a testament to his unwavering faith in the goodness of humanity.
In stark contrast, Trump's cell is a monument to excess, a gilded cage of indulgence and extravagance. Yet, for all its grandeur, it is a prison of his own making, a reflection of his insatiable appetite for wealth and power. His days are filled with anger and frustration, his demands for release falling on deaf ears.

Between these two extremes stands Jose Franco, a beacon of resilience amidst the tumult of uncertainty. Jose copes by creating and then dismantling "mandala sand painting” through visualization. In Tibetan Buddhism, creating mandalas out of colored sand is a form of meditation and spiritual practice. The intricate designs represent the universe in its divine form. Yet, amidst life’s turbulence, Jose Franco finds clarity and purpose through surrender, channeling his frustrations into a quest for truth and understanding.

As the days stretch into weeks and the weeks into months, a subtle transformation begins to take hold. Mujica's cell expands, its walls melting away to reveal a vast expanse of possibility. His simple way of life unlocks the secrets of the prison, granting him freedom in the truest sense of the word.

Meanwhile, Trump's cell begins to shrink, its walls closing in on him with each passing day. His ego and selfishness have become shackles, binding him to a fate of his own making. Despite his wealth and power, he remains a prisoner, trapped by the very desires that had fueled his ascent.

In the end, it is not wealth or power that determines their fates, but the choices they made in the face of adversity. Mujica emerges from his mental prison with a sense of peace and purpose, his spirit unbroken by the trials of his confinement. He returns to the world with a renewed commitment to his ideals, spreading hope and compassion wherever he goes.

Trump, on the other hand, seems bitter and resentful, his spirit continues to be crushed by the weight of his own arrogance. He blames others for his misfortune, vowing revenge upon those he perceives as his enemies. In his quest for dominance, he has become the architect of his own downfall.

And what of Jose Franco, the forgotten hero of our tale? His fate remains a mystery, his story lost to the sands of time. Yet, his legacy lives on through community service, a beacon of hope for those who dare to challenge the status quo.

The best we’ll ever be we are right now. All we really have is the present moment. How Mujica, Trump, and Franco continue to utilize the present moment serves as a poignant reminder of the complexities of human nature and the consequences of our actions. It speaks to the power of humility, altruism, and empathy in a world often defined by egoism and selfishness. And it challenges us to question the values that shape our society, to strive for a world where justice, compassion, and equality reign supreme.