--- Miles Jackson <cqmv at pdx.edu> wrote:
> andie nachgeborenen wrote:
>
> >Actually, this is a fundamental puzzle in political
> >science. If the costs of voting are more than
> trivial
> >(and they ofen are -- campaigning in Ohio in 2004 I
> >saw people stand for hours waiting to vote) and the
> >likihood that voting will have any effect is
> >negligible, which is certainly true, marginally
> >speaking, only the last vote that tips the balance
> >actually counts, why do presumptively rational
> people
> >bother?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> Simple answer: Despite the armchair speculation of
> many philosophers and
> economists, people aren't rational utilitarians.
> This view of human
> beings as "utility maximizers" has been refuted in
> literally hundreds of
> well-controlled psychological studies. --Thus the
> voting example is
> only a puzzle if try to understand it using a
> dubious theory of human
> behavior.
>
> Miles
> ___________________________________
>
http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com