Skip to main content
Log in

On seeing and being seen

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Social Choice and Welfare Aims and scope Submit manuscript

An Erratum to this article was published on 01 March 2017

This article has been updated

Abstract

The paper addresses John Roemer’s recent work on Kantian optimization and Kantian equilibria. Roemer argues that the standard economic theory of Nash equilibria is incapable of accounting for cooperative behavior such as recycling, reporting one’s income honestly, and voting in national elections. Instead we should assume that a cooperator is motivated to do what would most benefit her if all did the same. In commenting on this proposal, the first section of the paper summarizes Kant’s original formulation of the categorical imperative and relates it to psychological and historical studies of magical thinking. The next section distinguishes between unconditional and conditional norms of behavior and, within the latter, between the social norms of cooperation that can be triggered when what the agent does is being observed by others and the quasi-moral norms of cooperation that can be triggered when an agent observes what others do. To illustrate these ideas, the paper cites many experiments and historical case studies, the most important being the non-consumption, non-importation, and non-exportation movements in the American revolution. The concluding section summarizes Roemer’s own empirical work, and discusses critically his argument that his findings can be explained by assuming that agents are conditional Kantians.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Change history

  • 01 March 2017

    An erratum to this article has been published.

Notes

  1. Kant does not refer to the benefits that others might derive from the individual’s self-improvement: “as a rational being, he necessarily wills that all the capacities in him be developed, since they serve him and are given to him for all sorts of possible purposes”. Even Robinson Crusoe would be subject to this imperative.

  2. In unpublished work in progress, available at request, I speak less roughly.

  3. Pursuant to the editorial policy of this journal I do not list them in the bibliography, but John Roemer has authorized me to cite from them.

  4. I say “at least” because, among other possibilities, neuropsychology might offer some insights into “warm glow” motivations for cooperating; see Mayer, Harbaugh and Tankersley (2009) and the critical discussion in Elster (2011).

References

  • Arad A (2014) Avoiding greedy behavior in situations of uncertainty: the role of magical thinking. J Behav Exp Eco 53:17–23

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Breen T (2004) The marketplace of revolution. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Breen T (2010) American insurgents, American patriots. Hill and Wang, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen X, Chang X (2012) Costly posturing: relative status, ceremonies, and early child development in China, Working Paper (Yale School of Public Health)

  • Coleman S (1996) The Minnesota tax compliance experiment. Minnesota Department of Revenue

  • Coleman S (2007) The Minnesota tax compliance experiment: replication of the social norms experiment. Personal RePEc Archive, Munich

    Google Scholar 

  • Cooper R, DeJong D, Forsythe R (1996) Cooperation without reputation. Games Econ Behav 12:187–218

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dana J, Cain D, Dawes R (2006) What you don’t know won’t hurt me. Org Behav Hum Decis Process 100:193–201

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Einstein A, Podolsky B, Rosen N (1935) Can quantum-mechanical description of physical reality be considered complete? Phys Rev 47:777–780

  • Elster J (1989) The cement of society. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Elster J (1999) Alchemies of the mind. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Elster J (2011) The Valmont effect: the warm-glow theory of philanthropy. In: Illingworth P, Pogge T, Wenar L (eds) Giving well: the ethics of philanthropy. Oxford University Press, New York, pp 67–83

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Freudenberger H (1963) Fashion, sumptuary laws, and business. Bus Hist Rev 37:433–449

    Google Scholar 

  • Gerber A, Green D, Larimer C (2008) Social pressure and voter turnout. Am Polit Sci Rev 102:33–48

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Granovetter M (1978) Threshold models of collective behavior. Am J Sociol 83(1978):1420–1443

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hallsworth M et al (2014) The behavioralist as tax collector: using natural field experiments to enhance tax compliance, NBER Working Paper

  • Kant I (1996) Groundwork of the metaphysics of morals. In: The Cambridge edition of the works of Immanuel Kant: Practical philosophy. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 37–108

  • Luce RD, Raiffa H (1957) Games and decisions. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Mason G (1970) Papers, vol I. University of North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill

    Google Scholar 

  • Morris M, Sim D, Girotto V (1998) Distinguishing sources of cooperation in the one-round Prisoner’s dilemma. J Exp Soc Psychol 34:494–512

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nettle D et al (2013) The watching eyes in the dictator game. Evol Hum Behav 34:35–40

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nozick R (1969) Newcomb’s problem and two principles of choice. In: Rescher N et al (eds) Essays in honor of Carl Hempel. Reidel, Dordrecht, pp 114–146

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Proust M (1988) À l’ombre des jeunes filles en fleurs, in À la recherche du temps perdu, vol II. Gallimard, Paris, “Bibliothèque de la Pléiade”

  • Quattrone G, Tversky A (1984) Causal versus diagnostic contingencies: on self-deception and the voter’s illusion. J Person Soc Psychol 46:237–248

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roemer J (2010) Kantian equilibrium. Scand J Econ 112:1–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roemer J (2015) Kantian optimization. J Public Econ 127:45–57

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schlesinger A (1968) The colonial merchants and the American revolution. Atheneum, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Slemrod J, Thoresen T, Bø E (2015) Taxes on the Internet: deterrence effects of public disclosure. Am Econ J Econ Policy 7:36–62

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strickland L, Lewicki R, Katz A (1966) Temporal orientation and perceived control as a determinant of risk-taking. J Exp Soc Psychol 2:143–151

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson EP (1968) The making of the English working class. Penguin, Harmonsworth

    Google Scholar 

  • Weber Max (1968) Economy and society. Bedminster Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jon Elster.

Additional information

An erratum to this article is available at https://doi.org/10.1007/s00355-017-1039-7.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Elster, J. On seeing and being seen. Soc Choice Welf 49, 721–734 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00355-017-1029-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00355-017-1029-9

Navigation