Here are a few things I would like to do or do more of but don't.
1) floss my teeth every night.
2) wash dishes after every meal.
3) eat fruit.
4) stretch.
5) read.
6) write.
7) call family members.
8) write emails/call friends that I can't get to see.
9) paint.
10) sketch.
Why don't I? I don't buy the idea of revealed preference. I don't not do those things because I don't want to... or because they necessarily take a huge effort. I am also not a lazy person by nature... but there are things I just don't do, even if the desire is there.
I think it is because we have a natural inertia. It is the people who are able to get over that inertia that manage to do the most.
But it is remarkably difficult to do.
I am feeling more and more convinced that we should however avoid the excuse... `I just didn't have the time'. It is a bit of a cliche that might end me up (not for the first time) on Stuart list of things that people say that should result in a death penalty, but... it is amazing how the busiest people always seem to be able to fit things in.
I reckon, not matter how busy you are, you always have 5 minutes. And it is amazing what you can do in 5 minutes.
Read a blogpost?
Send an email to a friend?
Call someone just to say hello?
Allow someone to bounce an idea off you?
No matter, how busy you are... I reckon you have 5 minutes. BUT, I don't think this means you don't want to do the thing that takes 5 minutes... I think we get beaten by inertia.
3 comments:
I wouldn't take that approach in qustioning revealed preference. the problem is that it's tautologically true.
It's still right most of the time though.
What you call inertia is the cost of doing what you wanted to do. You see to just be looking at the benefits. taking costs and benefits together, you often do just prefer to sit on your arse.
"I wouldn't take that approach in qustioning revealed preference."
I know you wouldn't.
"the problem is that it's tautologically true."
I am not convinced. Just because you don't do something does mean you prefer not to. It may be short-term revealed preference, but sometimes it is not top of mind or we don't judge and act on medium or long term preferences.
"What you call inertia is the cost of doing what you wanted to do."
Short-term cost yes. Effort yes.
I am saying that the short term cost is small relative to the long term benefits, and if we were able to compare them properly we would do far more things with a long term mind set. My argument is that we give excessive weight to short term effort. I also don't think it is always a conscious thing.
So I think you are wrong in saying "taking costs and benefits together, you often do just prefer to sit on your arse."
I think we ignore the benefits and put excess weight on the cost.
I'm not sure you got what what I meant there. anyway, I think there are limits to its usefullness, and I don't think its a very precise concept.
BUT, and I don't have much data on this, but I'd guess that many people are obese simply because they feel more hungry than other people. it doesn't follow that they differ from those other people in how much they value being thin and healthy.
I'm sure if you asked both types (fat and thin) certain questions you could get similar answers on what they value. but in some sense, the fat person has revealed a preference for food over health or prettiness.
Post a Comment