Masonomics looks at the human brain as an organ that is highly evolved
to engage in deception, including self-deception. It can reason without
necessarily being rational. The way I see it, Masonomics does not
necessarily agree that humans tend to choose the best ways to achieve
their objectives. Instead, we are limited by our capacity for
self-deception, among other shortcomings.
That is from Arnold Kling.
What’s the difference between Masonomics and Hansonomics? This sounds so (Robin) Hansonian to me, but I admit I am not really that versed in either “school.”
Isn’t a preference for self-deception just as valid as any other?
Just what is the excellence? Self-puffery?
Comments on this entry are closed.