I have finally got around to reading Richard Thaler's fantastically wonderful book on Misbehaving . One thing that surprised me in the early chapters is how Thaler backs expected utility theory as the right way to think . Deviations from expected utility are then interpreted as humans not behaving 'as they should'. While I am familiar with this basic argument it still came as a surprise to me how firmly Thaler backed expected utility theory. And I'm not sure I buy this argument. To appreciate the issue consider some thought experiments. Thaler gives the following example: Stanley mows his lawn every weekend and it gives him terrible hay fever. I ask Stan why he doesn't hire a kid to mow his lawn. Stan says he doesn't want to pay the $10. I ask Stan whether he would mow his neighbor's lawn for $20 and Stan says no, of course not. From the point of view of expected utility theory Stan's behavior makes no sense. What we should do is calculate t...
Some random thoughts on game theory, behavioural economics, and human behaviour