Altruism and morality: some problems for Max U

This essay considers some limitations of the assumption of utility maximization (Max U) as an explanation of human action. Leading promoters of the assumption explicitly avoid the question of motivation, to focus instead on manifest behavior. Max U is strictly unfalsifiable. With appropriate assumptions and contextual variables, it can be made to fit any real-world behavior. Max U is neither specifically human nor a product of evolution: it assumes a static set of preferences. Altruism, by definition, can be costly. If those costs result overall in a net disutility, even with a “warm glow” from helping others, then this is incompatible with the Max U assumption, where no voluntary behavior reduces utility. Relevant too are criticisms of “folk psychology,” where behavior is deemed to stem from stable preferences and beliefs. We also need to consider the nature of moral sentiments and how they evolved in cooperative human groups. Overall, an evolutionary perspective enables the development of a richer explanation of human behavior, including moral motivations, altruism and self-interested pursuits.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Frontiers in Behavioral Economics
Published
2025-08-20
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3389/frbhe.2025.1610022
Primary Topic
Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Altruism and morality: some problems for Max U

Geoffrey M. Hodgson
Frontiers in Behavioral Economics
Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
article

Altruism and morality: some problems for Max U

Geoffrey M. Hodgson
article en

Abstract

This essay considers some limitations of the assumption of utility maximization (Max U) as an explanation of human action. Leading promoters of the assumption explicitly avoid the question of motivation, to focus instead on manifest behavior. Max U is strictly unfalsifiable. With appropriate assumptions and contextual variables, it can be made to fit any real-world behavior. Max U is neither specifically human nor a product of evolution: it assumes a static set of preferences. Altruism, by definition, can be costly. If those costs result overall in a net disutility, even with a “warm glow” from helping others, then this is incompatible with the Max U assumption, where no voluntary behavior reduces utility. Relevant too are criticisms of “folk psychology,” where behavior is deemed to stem from stable preferences and beliefs. We also need to consider the nature of moral sentiments and how they evolved in cooperative human groups. Overall, an evolutionary perspective enables the development of a richer explanation of human behavior, including moral motivations, altruism and self-interested pursuits.

Frontiers in Behavioral EconomicsVol. 4
Loughborough University (GB)
Openalex Percentile: Top 79%
Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Altruism and morality: some problems for Max U — Geoffrey M. Hodgson · Frontiers in Behavioral Economics (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS