Consortional main: The Social and Mental Dynamics of Cooperation  Page description

Help  Print 
Back »

 

Details of project

 
Identifier
72059
Type NN
Principal investigator Gintis, Herbert
Title in Hungarian Konzorcium, fő p.: A kooperáció társadalmi és mentális dinamikája
Title in English Consortional main: The Social and Mental Dynamics of Cooperation
Keywords in Hungarian evolució, kooperáció, kogníció, altruizmus, önzés
Keywords in English evolution, cooperation, cognition, altruism, self-regarding
Discipline
Phylogenetics, systematics, taxonomy, comparative biology, ecophysiology (Council of Complex Environmental Sciences)50 %
Psychology (Council of Humanities and Social Sciences)25 %
Ortelius classification: Experimental psychology
Theoretical biology, early evolution of life (Council of Complex Environmental Sciences)25 %
Panel Ecology and evolution
Department or equivalent Department of Economics (Central European University Foundation)
Starting date 2007-12-01
Closing date 2011-11-30
Funding (in million HUF) 5.625
FTE (full time equivalent) 0.79
state closed project
Summary in Hungarian
The various behavioural disciplines model human behaviour in distinct and incompatible ways. Among major incompatibilities is treatment of the individual as rational and self-interested in economics and biology, and the treatment of human social institutions as mechanisms fostering efficient cooperation among self-interested individuals. This contrasts with the view of the individual in social psychology, sociology and anthropology as a repository of cultural values, and the treatment of cooperation in society as a product of the internalization of cultural norms. Another major incompatibility is the use of game theory and decision theory in economics and biology to explain human behaviour, and the virtually complete rejection of these tools in the other disciplines. These incompatibilities show that the behavioural sciences fail to attain the status of true science, not because discrepancies exist, but because behavioural scientists have failed to address and adjudicate their differences. This causes problems for governmental research funding agencies whose behavioural budgets tend to be constrained by the unwillingness of policy makers and the tax-paying public to underwrite research activities with incompatible presumptions, yet whose principal investigators have no intention of confronting issues of interdisciplinary incompatibility.

The behavioural sciences all include models of individual human behaviour. Therefore, these models should be compatible. There should be a common underlying model to meet the particular needs of each discipline. Realizing this goal at present cannot be attained since the various behavioural disciplines currently have incompatible models. Yet recent theoretical and empirical developments have created the conditions for rendering coherent the areas of overlap of the various behavioural disciplines as outlined in this work. The analytical tools deployed in this task incorporate core principles from several behavioural disciplines.
Summary
The various behavioural disciplines model human behaviour in distinct and incompatible ways. Among major incompatibilities is treatment of the individual as rational and self-interested in economics and biology, and the treatment of human social institutions as mechanisms fostering efficient cooperation among self-interested individuals. This contrasts with the view of the individual in social psychology, sociology and anthropology as a repository of cultural values, and the treatment of cooperation in society as a product of the internalization of cultural norms. Another major incompatibility is the use of game theory and decision theory in economics and biology to explain human behaviour, and the virtually complete rejection of these tools in the other disciplines. These incompatibilities show that the behavioural sciences fail to attain the status of true science, not because discrepancies exist, but because behavioural scientists have failed to address and adjudicate their differences. This causes problems for governmental research funding agencies whose behavioural budgets tend to be constrained by the unwillingness of policy makers and the tax-paying public to underwrite research activities with incompatible presumptions, yet whose principal investigators have no intention of confronting issues of interdisciplinary incompatibility.

The behavioural sciences all include models of individual human behaviour. Therefore, these models should be compatible. There should be a common underlying model to meet the particular needs of each discipline. Realizing this goal at present cannot be attained since the various behavioural disciplines currently have incompatible models. Yet recent theoretical and empirical developments have created the conditions for rendering coherent the areas of overlap of the various behavioural disciplines as outlined in this work. The analytical tools deployed in this task incorporate core principles from several behavioural disciplines.





 

Final report

 
Results in Hungarian
I prepared several papers dealing with the nature of strong reciprocity and its evolution, as well as finishing up a book with Samuel bowles entitled A Cooperative Species: Human Cooperation and its Evolution (Princeton University press, 2011). I did not need the research funds provided by OTKA, so I am returning the. I prepared several papers dealing with the nature of strong reciprocity and its evolution, as well as finishing up a book with Samuel bowles entitled A Cooperative Species: Human Cooperation and its Evolution (Princeton University press, 2011). I did not need the research funds provided by OTKA, so I am returning the.
Results in English
I prepared several papers dealing with the nature of strong reciprocity and its evolution, as well as finishing up a book with Samuel bowles entitled A Cooperative Species: Human Cooperation and its Evolution (I prepared several papers dealing with the nature of strong reciprocity and its evolution, as well as finishing up a book with Samuel bowles entitled A Cooperative Species: Human Cooperation and its Evolution (Princeton University press, 2011). I did not need the research funds provided by OTKA, so I am returning the.Princeton University press, 2011). I did not need the research funds provided by OTKA, so I am returning the.
Full text https://www.otka-palyazat.hu/download.php?type=zarobeszamolo&projektid=72059
Decision
Yes





 

List of publications

 
Herbert Gintis: Game Theory Evolving, Second Edition, Princeton University Press, 2009




Back »