IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/jinsec/v5y2009i02p251-258_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Self-deceit and self-serving bias: Adam Smith on ‘General Rules’

Author

Listed:
  • KHALIL, ELIAS L.

Abstract

Adam Smith (1982) undertook a momentous project in The Theory of Moral Sentiments (TMS): He wanted to debunk the Cartesian dichotomy between the emotions (body) and rationality (mind). The debunking of the body/mind dichotomy is a major aim of many modern neuroscientists and neuroeconomists (e.g., Damasio, 1994; Glimcher, 2004; Rustichini, 2005). Smith also wanted to demonstrate that morality is grounded on the emotions – as the title of his book indicates. So for Smith, the twin pillars of what thinkers consider to be distinguishably human, namely, rationality and morality, are actually rooted in the emotions (body). More specifically, while rationality and morality are based on the emotions, Smith showed that the emotions are rather refined and sophisticated sentiments adopted by agents in light of how they judge the actions of others and, in turn, how they should judge their own actions. Such judgments are nothing but the determination of what is the rational (optimal) solution. So, sentiments are not hurdles in the pathway of rational decisions. They are rather the building blocks of such decisions.

Suggested Citation

  • Khalil, Elias L., 2009. "Self-deceit and self-serving bias: Adam Smith on ‘General Rules’," Journal of Institutional Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 5(2), pages 251-258, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:jinsec:v:5:y:2009:i:02:p:251-258_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1744137409001325/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Djawadi, Behnud Mir & Fahr, René, 2015. "“…and they are really lying”: Clean evidence on the pervasiveness of cheating in professional contexts from a field experiment," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 48-59.
    2. Elias L. Khalil, 2013. "Egotism: making sense of social preferences," Chapters, in: Luigino Bruni & Stefano Zamagni (ed.), Handbook on the Economics of Reciprocity and Social Enterprise, chapter 12, pages 121-133, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    3. Khalil, Elias L., 2013. "Lock-in institutions and efficiency," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 27-36.
    4. Elias L. Khalil, 2010. "Adam Smith’S Concept Of Self‐Command As A Solution To Dynamic Inconsistency And The Commitment Problem," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 48(1), pages 177-191, January.
    5. Khalil, Elias L., 2017. "Socialized view of man vs. rational choice theory: What does smith’s sympathy have to say?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 223-240.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cup:jinsec:v:5:y:2009:i:02:p:251-258_00. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/joi .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.