Nidhi Mathur
The Tyranny of Utility: Behavioural Social Science and the Rise of Paternalism, Gilles Saint-Paul, Princeton University Press, Pp 163, £ 27.95
Today our life seems to be regulated by all kinds of do’s and don’ts. One sees an increasing trend towards a increased regulation of private life. Armed with studies and statistics, government officials and their experts tell us how greater coercion imposed on individual behaviour saves that many lives and money. The French Declaration of Human Rights declared more than 200 years ago: “Liberty consists in the freedom to do everything which injures no one else; how the exercise of the natural rights of each man has no limits except those which assure to the other members of the society that enjoyment of the same rights.” Today this seems to have been forgotten.
The book describes the rise of paternalistic policies and their dangers. It specifically relates this phenomenon to parallel developments in the social scenario. Of all the social scenarios, economics is one that has traditionally struck to the individualistic values of the Enlightenment. The author is of the view that intellectuals including scientists are supposed to be “concerned citizens” and want to “make the world a better place”, where economists are believed to support “free markets’, “free trade” and limited government. So how can the latter be concerned about improving the situation of their fellow citizens?
The answer is supposed to lie in the so-called neoclassical economics, which is grounded on utilitarianism. Utilitarianism states that “society” should be organised so as to yield the greatest possible level of welfare, where it is assumed that there is some way of comparing and adding welfare across individuals. Adam Smith’s invisible hand states a maximum level of total welfare is reached by letting people decide what is best for them. For the invisible hand to make sense, individuals should be unitary (have consistent goals and preferences) and rational (make the right decisions, given their constraints and information in order to satisfy their preferences). In other words, they know where their interest lies and are capable of pursuing it.
Therefore, neo-classical economics draws a bridge between the positivist perspective of a would-be benevolent dictator attempting to design society optimally and the liberal perspective of a political philosopher of the Enlightenment, for whom preserving individual rights and keeping governments in check is a critical goal.
This brand new economics – behavioural economics provides foundations for much wider government intervention than before. At the same time, we see increased government attempts at regulating individual behaviour in matters such as consumption, savings, education, risk taking and speech. Just as traditional economics could be viewed as an important intellectual cornerstone of Enlightenment’s “liberal” society, behavioural economics will contribute to the foundation of the new paternalistic state. The author is sounding the alarm bell as individual freedom will be replaced by coercive policies with government exercising greater control through more efficient tools of information technology and ignoring that individual freedom and responsibility are central social values.
(Princeton University Press, 41 William Street, Princeton, New Jersey – 08540)
Comments