Home
/
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
/
Economic man is a myth, but ‘nudging’ is a distraction
Economic man is a myth, but ‘nudging’ is a distraction
Apr 14, 2026 3:39 PM

The University of Chicago’s Richard Thaler recently won the Nobel Prize for his contributions in behavioral economics, much of which centers on challenging rational choice theory.

“Renowned for his use of data to observe and predict how people behave in the real world,” writes Derek Thompson, “Thaler’s career has been a lifelong war on Homo economicus, that mythical species of purely rational hominids who dwell exclusively in the models of classical economic theory.”

Victor Claar has helpfully summarized Thaler’s work at length, noting his popular framework of “nudge units, which provide a government mechanism for prodding us into “making choices that are better than the ones we might make otherwise.” Claar rightly challenges us to consider the risks of promoting the government as “nudger-in-chief,” and Rev. Ben Johnson offers at least one example of the type of destruction that “nudging” sometimes promotes. Alas, as economist David Henderson reminds us, we’d do well to apply Thaler’s same theory of irrationality to the nudgers who nudgers.

This isn’t to say that behavioral economics as a science is of little value, nor that its applications will only lead to economic disaster. Indeed, in its most basic intellectual assumptions, Thaler’s “lifelong war on homo economicus” offers a healthy correction: Man is not a robot.

In many ways, the economic planners of yore have ignored that reality, using rational man as in put that distortsour public policy, perverts our incentives, and lead to economic ruin. In turn, this leads us to ignore the social and spiritual side of the human person, excusing away our thoughts and affections at the mercy of a cold and limiting earthbound order.

What’s more important, however, is whether those lessons are applied before and beyond the battles about public policy and government intervention.

In Thaler’s case, the goal of es next, distracting us from the broader implications. In doing so, he risks the same mistakes of the rational-choice theorizers, but in the other direction, treating humans as pawns to be moved or consumers to be manipulated.

So if “nudging” isn’t the obvious next step, how are we to respond in a world wherein economic man is now myth?As Father Sirico writes in the concluding chapter of his book,Defending the Free Market, we do so simply by pursuing and preserving freedom (and using that freedom rightly):

In real life, people are motivated by much more than what economists describe as “maximizing utility” – especially where “utility” is understood in narrowly materialistic terms. The economic truth of economic man is true enough (you ignore human self-interest and the laws of supply and demand at your peril), but it is not the whole truth about who human beings are.

Any man who was only economic man would be a lost soul. And any civilization that produced only homines economici to fill its markets, courts, legislative bodies, and other institutions would soon enough be a lost civilization. Familial love, voluntary dedication to philanthropy and faith, the creation of art and music would be at their most minimal level, and whole sectors of life pletely vanish…

The good news is that by rolling up our sleeves and digging for the truth, by retrieving a right understanding of the human person, we can turn things around. The tradition that gave birth to a morally animated liberty—not merely the power to do what onewantsbut the right to do what oneought(as Lord Acton observed)—is not a tradition of mere utility, selfishness, pleasure-seeking, or determinism. Freedom rightly understood is not a license to behave like spoiled adolescents but rather the noble birthright of creators made in the image of God. As long as we refuse to sell this birthright for a mess of materialist pottage, hope remains.

As humans created in the image of God, destined to glorify him in all that they do, our actions will often depart from the tidy boxes and categories of modern academia and economic science, even in the case of Thaler’s cutting-edge paths to “predictability.”

Psychology matters, but how do we account for the roles of Word and Soul and Spirit? Thaler and others in his pioneering discipline are doing us a great service in dismantling false notions of economic man, but how we respond to that reality demands a great deal more than good psychology and clever political game-playing.

It requires freedom, and with that freedom, the will to chooselove – “rationally,” “irrationally,” and otherwise.

Image: Behavioural Economics, Chatham House (CC BY 2.0)

Comments
Welcome to mreligion comments! Please keep conversations courteous and on-topic. To fosterproductive and respectful conversations, you may see comments from our Community Managers.
Sign up to post
Sort by
Show More Comments
RELIGION & LIBERTY ONLINE
Thomas Jefferson, Catholic sisters, and Obamacare
It’s easy to read that headline and think, “Wha…?” What in the world do Founding Father Thomas Jefferson, Catholic Sisters and our present day health laws have to do with each other? I’m glad you asked. More than 200 years ago, the Ursuline Sisters of France were fleeing the French Revolution and seeking a new home in New Orleans. They planned to open schools, hospitals and orphanages, but wanted to make sure that the U.S. government, now in control of...
It’s Not Enough to Care About ‘The Poor’
“Each of us has a personal responsibility to heed the call to care for the poor,” says Jennifer A. Marshall. “The Bible doesn’t leave us room to make poverty someone else’s problem.” Long before LBJ’s call bat poverty, Christians heard a higher call passion for the poor. How to live out that mand in the context of 21st-century America is the challenge. And it’s one that thinkers such asSherman, author of the bookKingdom Calling: Vocational Stewardship for the Common Good,have...
The J. Wellington Wimpy Budget Policy
In ment last month on the proposed federal budget deal, Sen. Rand Paul quoted one of the foremost economic thinkers of the twentieth century. “There is a recurring theme in Washington budget negotiations. It’s I’ll gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today. I think it’s a huge mistake to trade sequester cuts now, for the promise of cuts later,” Sen. Paul said. “I’ll gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today,” was a catchphrase made famous by J. Wellington...
Taxpayer-Funded Abortions And Obamacare
Today, Professor Helen Alvaré of George Mason University, testified before the House Judiciary Committee mittee on the Constitution and Civil Justice regarding taxpayer-funded abortions under Obamacare. Alvaré, who teaches family law, law and religion, and property law, states that Americans have never understood abortion as a “good,” and that abortion cannot be labeled health care. The video below is her testimony. ...
Whom Would Jesus Indebt?
Putting ourselves and our children further in debt, notes Timothy Dalrymple, is not the way to help the poor: One of the great difficulties of this issue, for Christians, is that the morality of spending and debt has been so thoroughly demagogued that it’s impossible to advocate cuts in government spending without being accused of hatred for the poor and needy. A group calling itself the “Circle of Protection” recently promoted a statement on “Why We Need to Protect Programs...
Is the $17 Trillion Federal Debt Immoral?
Even when we agree on what Biblical principles should guide our political choices, evangelicals from the left and right rarely agree on policy solutions. But there is one area where there appears to be an increasingly significant level of agreement: the immorality of our national debt. At Christianity Today, David P. Gushee — an ethicist and politically progressive evangelical — explains why the $17 trillion national debt is both immoral and unwise: Most progressive evangelicals who address government spending focus...
At-A-Glance: Public Vs. Private Sector Health Care
The Washington Examiner has published a chart that clearly lays out the difference between Obamacare versus private sector health care. Using Walmart as an example (despite the employer’s much-disparaged employee benefits), Elliot Smilowitz at the Examiner shows that the private sector is able to parable health care at much less expense than Obamacare. ...
Acton University 2014 Speaker Spotlight: Makoto Fujimura
Makoto Fujimura, in many ways, defies being labeled. He is an artist. He is an author. He is a speaker. But none of pletely capture who Fujimura is. Perhaps one way to understand Fujimura is to take a look at mencement address he made at Biola University: To ask “what do you want to make today?” is not an idealist’s escape from reality. To ask “what do you want to make today?” is a quiet resistance against the destructive fears...
Kuyper on Revolution
From CLP‘s newly released Guidance for Christian Engagement in Government, the first-ever English translation of Abraham Kuyper’s Our Program: What we oppose is “the Revolution,” by which we mean the political and social system embodied in the French Revolution… What bat, on principle and promise, is the attempt to totally change how a person thinks and how he lives, to change his head and his heart, his home and his country—to create a state of affairs the very opposite of...
Fatherlessness and the War on Poverty
In addition to reading Joe Carter’s striking by-the-numbers piece on the War on Poverty, and in keeping with Sam Gregg’s reflections on the deeper social and cultural forces at work, I heartily mend taking in Josh Good’s excellent retrospective in AEI’sThe American. Leveraging a lengthy quote from Herman Bavinck’s The Christian Family, one I’ve put to use myself, Good notes the “inverse impact of changing family structure on productive work and a flourishing economy”: The fact is, poverty is not...
Related Classification
Copyright 2023-2026 - www.mreligion.com All Rights Reserved