Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Why we think it's OK to cheat and steal (sometimes)

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Why we think it's OK to cheat and steal (sometimes)

    Talks Dan Ariely: Why we think it's OK to cheat and steal (sometimes)

    Dan Ariely: Behavioral economist

    Despite our best efforts, bad or inexplicable decisions are as inevitable as death and taxes and the grocery store running out of your favorite flavor of ice cream. They're also just as predictable. Why, for instance, are we convinced that "sizing up" at our favorite burger joint is a good idea, even when we're not that hungry? Why are our phone lists cluttered with numbers we never call? Dan Ariely, behavioral economist, has based his career on figuring out the answers to these questions, and in his bestselling book Predictably Irrational (which will be re-released in expanded form in May 2009), he describes many unorthodox and often downright odd experiments used in the quest to answer this question.

    Ariely has long been fascinated with how emotional states, moral codes and peer pressure affect our ability to make rational and often extremely important decisions in our daily lives -- across a spectrum of our interests, from economic choices (how should I invest?) to personal (who should I marry?). At Duke, he's aligned with three departments (business, economics and cognitive neuroscience); he's also a visiting professor in MIT's Program in Media Arts and Sciences and a founding member of the Center for Advanced Hindsight. His hope that studying and understanding the decision-making process can help people lead better, more sensible daily lives.
    "If you want to know why you always buy a bigger television than you intended, or why you think it's perfectly fine to spend a few dollars on a cup of coffee at Starbucks, or why people feel better after taking a 50-cent aspirin but continue to complain of a throbbing skull when they're told the pill they took just cost one penny, Ariely has the answer."
    Daniel Gross, Newsweek
    17 min



  • #2
    Re: Why we think it's OK to cheat and steal (sometimes)

    Rajiv,

    What a superb and insightful talk! Thanks for posting it.

    I like his point about conducting a systematic experimentation of our intuition. It is difficult to accept that what one “knows”, or could know, may be wrong.

    -Sapiens

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Why we think it's OK to cheat and steal (sometimes)

      Thank you Rajiv.

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Why we think it's OK to cheat and steal (sometimes)

        I also think he had important points about "the code of honor" and the "Tee-shirt effect"

        Should we institute a "Banker's code of ethics?"

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Why we think it's OK to cheat and steal (sometimes)

          I still haven't got an answer to my question bout Shakespeare. Knew how he felt about lawyers. What did he say about bankers?

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Why we think it's OK to cheat and steal (sometimes)

            Originally posted by vanvaley1 View Post
            I still haven't got an answer to my question bout Shakespeare. Knew how he felt about lawyers. What did he say about bankers?
            Contrary to the conventional wisdom, Shakespeare was praising lawyers. I have little doubt however about his dislike of bankers.

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Why we think it's OK to cheat and steal (sometimes)

              Great talk.

              His point about intuition directly relates to a central part of my personal philosophy, which is that feelings -- which include intuition -- are not knowledge. You can't know about the world just based on how you feel. It was wonderful to see a thoroughly scientific approach to showing how that's true.

              On the subject of honesty and cheating, while his insights were also interesting, I think he didn't see the big picture. He seemed to approach the question from the beginning with the perspective of a pragmatist. His assumption was that everyone makes some pragmatic decision about whether to cheat or steal -- how much are they stealing, can they get away with it, who else is doing it, etc. While that probably is the dominant philosophy in the US, it is by no means the only one. There are also people who have strong principles, who simply know that cheating is wrong no matter what the circumstance. I would argue that the degree and nature of pragmatism in American industry is just a symptom of the problem. The real underlying issue is a lack of principles.

              Comment

              Working...
              X