IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/prg/jnlpep/v2015y2015i2id506p154-172.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Homo Economicus and Homo Stramineus

Author

Listed:
  • Marek Hudík

Abstract

The model of Homo economicus has often been criticized as unrealistic. In particular, it has been found lacking for allegedly assuming that people are selish, an assumption which is contradicted by both introspection and empirical evidence. The aim of this paper is to show that never in the history of the economic discipline has selishness constituted the core of the Homo economicus model. In fact, the standard economic model of behaviour which has been used by economists for more than a hundred years is reticent about the motives of behaviour. Critics thus do not criticize Homo economicus but a straw man - Homo stramineus. Three possible reasons for confusing Homo economicus with Homo stramineus are identiied: malicious intent, ignorance and an attempt to avoid the tautological model of behaviour.

Suggested Citation

  • Marek Hudík, 2015. "Homo Economicus and Homo Stramineus," Prague Economic Papers, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2015(2), pages 154-172.
    • Handle: RePEc:prg:jnlpep:v:2015:y:2015:i:2:id:506:p:154-172
    DOI: 10.18267/j.pep.506
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://pep.vse.cz/doi/10.18267/j.pep.506.html
    Download Restriction: free of charge
    File URL: http://pep.vse.cz/doi/10.18267/j.pep.506.pdf
    Download Restriction: free of charge
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.18267/j.pep.506?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Szenberg, Michael & Ramrattan, Lall & Gottesman, Aron A. (ed.), 2006. "Samuelsonian Economics and the Twenty-First Century," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199298839.
    2. Rosenberg, Alexander, 1992. "Economics--Mathematical Politics or Science of Diminishing Returns?," University of Chicago Press Economics Books, University of Chicago Press, edition 1, number 9780226727233, January.
    3. Samuel Bowles & Herbert Gintis, 2000. "Walrasian Economics in Retrospect," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 115(4), pages 1411-1439.
    4. John Conlisk, 1996. "Why Bounded Rationality?," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 34(2), pages 669-700, June.
    5. Fisher, Irving, 1918. "Is "Utility" the Most Suitable Term for the Concept It is Used to Denote?," History of Economic Thought Articles, McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought, vol. 8, pages 335-337.
    6. repec:ucp:bkecon:9780226320670 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. David Lipka, 2012. "The Max U Approach: Prudence-only, or Not Even Prudence? A Smithian Perspective," ICER Working Papers 09-2012, ICER - International Centre for Economic Research.
    8. Ariel Rubinstein & Yuval Salant, 2012. "Eliciting Welfare Preferences from Behavioural Data Sets," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 79(1), pages 375-387.
    9. Luigino Bruni & Robert Sugden, 2007. "The road not taken: how psychology was removed from economics, and how it might be brought back," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 117(516), pages 146-173, January.
    10. Mas-Colell, Andreu & Whinston, Michael D. & Green, Jerry R., 1995. "Microeconomic Theory," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195102680.
    11. Hayek, F. A., 2012. "The Trend of Economic Thinking," University of Chicago Press Economics Books, University of Chicago Press, edition 1, number 9780226321363 edited by Bartley, III, W. W. & Kresge, Stephen, January.
    12. Wesley C. Mitchell, 1910. "The Rationality of Economic Activity," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 18(3), pages 197-197.
    13. Force,Pierre, 2003. "Self-Interest before Adam Smith," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521830607, October.
    14. B. Douglas Bernheim & Antonio Rangel, 2007. "Toward Choice-Theoretic Foundations for Behavioral Welfare Economics," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(2), pages 464-470, May.
    15. E. H. Downey, 1910. "The Futility of Marginal Utility," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 18(4), pages 253-253.
    16. Cowen, Tyler, 1989. "Are all tastes constant and identical? : A critique of Stigler and Becker," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 11(1), pages 127-135, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Marek Hudik, 2019. "Two interpretations of the rational choice theory and the relevance of behavioral critique," Rationality and Society, , vol. 31(4), pages 464-489, November.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jimena Hurtado, 2005. "The Utilitarian Foundations Of The Economic Approach To Human Behavior," Documentos CEDE 3633, Universidad de los Andes, Facultad de Economía, CEDE.
    2. Athreya, Kartik B., 2014. "Big Ideas in Macroeconomics: A Nontechnical View," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262019736, April.
    3. Fontana, Magda, 2010. "Can neoclassical economics handle complexity? The fallacy of the oil spot dynamic," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 76(3), pages 584-596, December.
    4. Jacobs Martin, 2016. "Accounting for Changing Tastes: Approaches to Explaining Unstable Individual Preferences," Review of Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 67(2), pages 121-183, August.
    5. Roberto Fumagalli, 2016. "Decision sciences and the new case for paternalism: three welfare-related justificatory challenges," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 47(2), pages 459-480, August.
    6. Nathan Berg & Gerd Gigerenzer, 2010. "As-if behavioral economics: neoclassical economics in disguise?," History of Economic Ideas, Fabrizio Serra Editore, Pisa - Roma, vol. 18(1), pages 133-166.
    7. Rohan Dutta & Sean Horan, 2015. "Inferring Rationales from Choice: Identification for Rational Shortlist Methods," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 7(4), pages 179-201, November.
    8. Yusufcan Masatlioglu & Daisuke Nakajima & Erkut Y. Ozbay, 2012. "Revealed Attention," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(5), pages 2183-2205, August.
    9. Markus K. Brunnermeier & Alp Simsek & Wei Xiong, 2014. "A Welfare Criterion For Models With Distorted Beliefs," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 129(4), pages 1753-1797.
    10. Aronsson, Thomas & Johansson-Stenman, Olof, 2011. "Animal Welfare and Social Decisions," Working Papers in Economics 485, University of Gothenburg, Department of Economics.
    11. Jacob Goldin & Daniel Reck, 2018. "Revealed Preference Analysis with Framing Effects," NBER Working Papers 25139, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Kyle Glenn, 2021. "How Do We Choose? Towards an Alternative Theory of Consumer Behavior," Working Papers 2114, New School for Social Research, Department of Economics.
    13. Hiroki Nishimura, 2014. "The Transitive Core: Inference of Welfare from Nontransitive Preference Relations," Working Papers 201419, University of California at Riverside, Department of Economics.
    14. Nishimura, Hiroki, 2018. "The transitive core: inference of welfare from nontransitive preference relations," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 13(2), May.
    15. Gintis, Herbert, 2004. "Modeling cooperation among self-interested agents: a critique," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 33(6), pages 695-714, December.
    16. repec:bla:ecorec:v:85:y:2009:i:s1:p:s29-s34 is not listed on IDEAS
    17. Luigi Mittone & Mauro Papi, 2017. "Does inducing choice procedures make individuals better off? An experimental study," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 83(1), pages 37-59, June.
    18. Clist, Paul & Hong, Ying-yi, 2023. "Do international students learn foreign preferences? The interplay of language, identity and assimilation," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 98(C).
    19. Niclas Berggren, 2012. "Time for behavioral political economy? An analysis of articles in behavioral economics," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 25(3), pages 199-221, September.
    20. Marek Hudik, 2019. "Two interpretations of the rational choice theory and the relevance of behavioral critique," Rationality and Society, , vol. 31(4), pages 464-489, November.
    21. Schlee, Edward E. & Ali Khan, M., 2023. "Money-metrics in local welfare analysis: Pareto improvements and equity considerations," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    utility; self-interest; rationality; Homo economicus; desire of wealth;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • B12 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - History of Economic Thought through 1925 - - - Classical (includes Adam Smith)
    • B13 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - History of Economic Thought through 1925 - - - Neoclassical through 1925 (Austrian, Marshallian, Walrasian, Wicksellian)
    • B21 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - History of Economic Thought since 1925 - - - Microeconomics
    • B41 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Economic Methodology - - - Economic Methodology
    • D01 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Microeconomic Behavior: Underlying Principles

    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:prg:jnlpep:v:2015:y:2015:i:2:id:506:p:154-172. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: Stanislav Vojir (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/uevsecz.html .

    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.