The
idea that we actually have a part of the brain that is willing to share equally
is pretty amazing. Part of the human mind actually appreciates fairness even if
it means that you as an individual lose something of value. What seems often
like an economic assumption (that people do all things out of selfishness) may
at times be untrue. It is something even
chimpanzees do not appear to have. So whether you believe it is God-given
ability or an evolutionary trait, it really is something to marvel at and as
economists pursuing maximization of utility a new toy when creating theory. I saw a few problems with the model of
pulling a string to get marbles and then exchanging marbles. First of all they
are little kids. They haven’t developed into the stubborn people that policy
makers have to deal with. Then they are dealing with marbles. Change that to
something the child actually puts a higher value on and then see what happens. Money is not marbles. Greed is part of the issue with wealth
distribution. Even if someone really thinks that others deserve something, I
feel as if money is a whole other ballgame. Feel free to argue against me but I
think the comparison just is not realistic or useful. Redo the experiment with something children
would give up their whole life to accumulate that item.
From my
own experience this does not that often. It seems like that cheesy moment in a
sports movie where the guy gives up his spot for the guy who has worked his
butt off or just hasn’t been given a chance. Though this is minor and I can’t
think of a specific example I know that this has happened. Imagine a bunch of little
league baseball players get rewarded with 2 Gatorade bottles for a game well
fought. All of the kids run to get their drink but the suppliers miscounted and
inevitably “Little Timmy” just didn’t make it in time to get a bottle. Not
involving any parent, one of the other kids offers him one of their bottles and
they go on their way. It is a simple selfless transaction. A work example might involve someone taking on
my responsibilities as a student manager. We hold chains/down markers during
practice and there is no real rule on whose job it is to hold them. If someone
has had an easy day of standing around they may take the duty of the person who
usually has to stand with a chain. There is no rule that says they have to, it
is simply out of the desire for fairness and respect for that individual’s
effort. I recommend that you take a look
at John’s example of note exchanging as it may be a slightly stronger example-
and has to do with school.
The next
set of questions is slightly unclear to me but I will take a stab. I will try to base this off of the second
piece’s cookie for socializing example. I think for me I will go back to my freshman
and sophomore years and my poor attempts to find a group of people to socialize
with. I did not enjoy the party scene my freshman and sophomore years, as it
was simply not me, but that did not stop me from showing up and being that
awkward dude who looks like he is lost and incredibly boring. I did not drink,
but I enjoyed the company of others, even if it meant sacrificing comfort and
not being able to form any remotely strong connections. Despite the lack of
enjoyment in the activity, I kept going because of maybe a false sense of
acceptance (not trying to be a psychologist). Whatever the reason I think that
I adjusted; realizing people were everywhere, not just at my buddies’ apartment
parties. I found my way into CRU which has been great for me and for hanging
around people share appreciation for activities that I enjoy too.