You cite a good example of where it's useful to know about basic psychology: A rational person will tend to choose his own well-being, loyalty to family, friends, tribe, religion, nation, etc. over those of outsiders. There are many other ways that could be phrased: A rational person tends to act in his own self-interest. Sure, there are…
You cite a good example of where it's useful to know about basic psychology: A rational person will tend to choose his own well-being, loyalty to family, friends, tribe, religion, nation, etc. over those of outsiders. There are many other ways that could be phrased: A rational person tends to act in his own self-interest. Sure, there are cases where a person will act altruistically and sacrifice himself for others or for a group, for an ideal he believes in. But that's rare. In other words, you are a fool if you put yourself into a position where you hope someone will put his own interests aside. Hoping that someone will risk his own ass just for you is not a smart way to bet. Note that none of the foregoing says a person so acting is "evil." Yes, surely the would-be beneficiary would be expected to feel that way. Yet the impartial observer would say no, the would be benefactor is merely acting in his own self-interest, and the "victim" is in the wrong, expecting others to act against self-interest.
That's why some knowledge of pop psychology is helpful. For example, consider an economic transaction (and seeing your doctor is one). How is the other party compensated? Complications like the risk of fraud always exist, but a lot can be inferred by knowing actual or likely potential conflicts of interest. Of course it depend upon the situation. For example, in court, plaintiff and defendant optimally want a lawyer who represents their interest only. The judge should be impartial, having no conflicts of interest either way. Alas, the real world is rarely so clear-cut. Oftentimes, the best one can do is to be aware of the actual or probable conflicts of interest and manage how they may influence the other party's behavior.
A final comment: I NEVER was taught anything remotely like the above in school, and I've got a BS STEM degree and a MA in a liberal art. The closest I came to moral insights might have been in various religion teaching I received. Yet the psychology or morality I outlined above is basic stuff. I learned it from articles, independent reading, even from economics texts.
You cite a good example of where it's useful to know about basic psychology: A rational person will tend to choose his own well-being, loyalty to family, friends, tribe, religion, nation, etc. over those of outsiders. There are many other ways that could be phrased: A rational person tends to act in his own self-interest. Sure, there are cases where a person will act altruistically and sacrifice himself for others or for a group, for an ideal he believes in. But that's rare. In other words, you are a fool if you put yourself into a position where you hope someone will put his own interests aside. Hoping that someone will risk his own ass just for you is not a smart way to bet. Note that none of the foregoing says a person so acting is "evil." Yes, surely the would-be beneficiary would be expected to feel that way. Yet the impartial observer would say no, the would be benefactor is merely acting in his own self-interest, and the "victim" is in the wrong, expecting others to act against self-interest.
That's why some knowledge of pop psychology is helpful. For example, consider an economic transaction (and seeing your doctor is one). How is the other party compensated? Complications like the risk of fraud always exist, but a lot can be inferred by knowing actual or likely potential conflicts of interest. Of course it depend upon the situation. For example, in court, plaintiff and defendant optimally want a lawyer who represents their interest only. The judge should be impartial, having no conflicts of interest either way. Alas, the real world is rarely so clear-cut. Oftentimes, the best one can do is to be aware of the actual or probable conflicts of interest and manage how they may influence the other party's behavior.
A final comment: I NEVER was taught anything remotely like the above in school, and I've got a BS STEM degree and a MA in a liberal art. The closest I came to moral insights might have been in various religion teaching I received. Yet the psychology or morality I outlined above is basic stuff. I learned it from articles, independent reading, even from economics texts.
Common sense wins out over the ivory tower morons all the time.
Almost no one truly gives a shit about your problems unless it affects them directly.
Most, yes.