I think the point of view that nearly half of your fellow citizens aren't capable of making good choices is pretty silly.
I think sane citizens supporting patriarchal rulers, especially when those rulers have proven themselves basically selfish and untrustworthy, their shameless behaviour openly on display for decades, is super surprising.
By the way, that's Thaler's own description: patriarchal. He views the ruling class as basically responsible for cajoling and nudging an unruly mass of unthinking golems toward some future state.
It seems you're a big fan of this patriarchs. Seems strange to support that unless you're part of the ruling class. If so, more power to ya, if not, can I ask why you think they're qualified in any way to do this nudging? Why do you think the outcomes they want are going to be good for you personally?
Patriarchal? Are you sure you don't mean paternal?
> why you think they're qualified in any way to do this nudging? Why do you think the outcomes they want are going to be good for you personally?
I think publicly sanctioned (ie. elected) rulers should craft policy that alters people's behavior in positive ways.
This is the underpinning of representative democracy, we trust our representatives to make more thoughtful decisions on issues than we do ourselves, because they have more time to think on it and it is their full-time job. If we don't trust them to do that, we don't vote for them.
Of course, that can break down - if for instance, the primary thing deciding elections is a bunch of idiots voting based on TV ads.
But the problem there is with the representative process, not with the concept of "nudging."
> Why do you think the outcomes they want are going to be good for you personally?
I don't always want outcomes that are good for me personally, I want outcomes that I consider to be good and just.
I don't think we always get that, but I think "nudging" can certainly be a tool to realize those outcomes.
I did mean paternalism, thank you for the correction.
I agree with you that nudging can certainly be a tool to realize outcomes.
I seem to have a disagreement with you in that it seems obvious to me that governments across the world have zero to offer in the way of visions for a future that are at all positive for me personally, my family, my community.
I think our institutions are not worthy of trust, and I think there is ample evidence that every major institutional category is captured and serves the interests of a tiny elite. You said 'mask off' in your earlier comment, and I think that's interesting because from where I'm sitting the mask is off, but it's the rulers' masks--they clearly view the common citizenry as a threat and a nuisance, and their goals have nothing to do with our wellbeing. Whatever stated goals they have are two-faced and half-hearted.
I think sane citizens supporting patriarchal rulers, especially when those rulers have proven themselves basically selfish and untrustworthy, their shameless behaviour openly on display for decades, is super surprising.
By the way, that's Thaler's own description: patriarchal. He views the ruling class as basically responsible for cajoling and nudging an unruly mass of unthinking golems toward some future state.
It seems you're a big fan of this patriarchs. Seems strange to support that unless you're part of the ruling class. If so, more power to ya, if not, can I ask why you think they're qualified in any way to do this nudging? Why do you think the outcomes they want are going to be good for you personally?