More anarchy?
freedom is better than legislation and coercion
which has now also been proven scientifically!
After in economic theory and the prevailing political sciences of man is man only by purely selfish motives and can therefore only be controlled by legislation, that external pressure to humanity, are also "socially desirable" behavior to be related. To enforce these provisions a "strong" state is necessary to have for the course of the monopoly must .
Already the Scottish moral philosopher Adam Smith (1723-1790), founder of modern economics doubted in his Theory of Moral Sentiments "(1759) this principle very selfish man. The people were in his view, not only by selfish drives intended for each other but also from the "sympathy". Since man can always put yourself in his fellow man, he was also able to accept their fate share, so empathize. This capacity for "sympathy" care primarily for the cohesion of a society and not just the monopoly of the Israeli economists Staates.Die Uri Gneezy and Aldo Rustichini several studies have now the first direct evidence for this theory of Adam Smith find.
Uri Gneezy and Aldo Rustichini
(Source: http://www.rady. ucsd.edu / faculty / directory / Gneezy /
and http://www.econ.umn.edu/ ~ arust / )
In several nurseries in the Israeli city of Haifa was analyzed, impact of fines for parents their children pick up late afternoon. According to conventional reading should decrease the extent of the delays actually, if it is assumed, that the disincentive deterrent effect by the fine. But it happened exactly the opposite! Once a fine has been introduced for late coming parents took their tardiness significantly. Although the fine was abolished, it remained at this now greater degree of lateness.
The increase in delays by introducing a penalty in the 4th week was also by abolishing the 17.Woche not be reversed.
(black = white test group, control group = )
Source: http://rady.ucsd.edu/faculty/directory/gneezy/docs/fine.pdf
for this surprising result, the two scientists a very plausible explanation: Before the introduction
the fine was a matter of fairness. his children to pick up on time, because otherwise had to make the kindergarten teachers involuntary overtime to the coming generation watch . This had seen the parents as a "friendship" with no direct consideration and it was a bid for most of the decency to take it only when necessary to complete.
With the introduction of this penalty changed the delay had been given an award and the "friendship" had become an additional service that was to pay as much as other services of the crèche also. The tardiness has been an acceptable behavior!
This new view was then also by the abolition of the penalty not rid the world.
A strong inner motivation, a sense of fairness was a weak external motivation, the threat of financial penalty, a provision of criminal penalties, therefore, been replaced, and then everything worked much worse. It is worthwhile to really want to regulate so many regulations, interpersonal matters to reconsider and perhaps to venture once more anarchy!
Jens Christian Heuer
Source: Gneezy, U., and A. Rustichini " A Fine is a Price ," Journal of Legal Studies , vol. XXIX, 1, part 1, 2000, 1-18 ( http://rady.ucsd.edu/faculty/directory/gneezy/docs/fine.pdf )
