Capitalism, Socialism, Communism and Human Motivation

[icehorse]

Picking up this conversation from a DIR forum:

If the US Goes To War With North Korea, I Hope It Loses.

When we last saw our heroes they were discussing how perhaps the extrinsic motivations so obvious in capitalist societies are now outdated.

So I guess the first question is this: When comparing these economic models is one of the fundamental questions "how do they relate to human motivation?" ? I'd say so. Perhaps the capitalist would argue that without the extrinsic motivation to "get ahead", we humans would stagnate? I believe the communist might argue that humans are more healthily driven by intrinsic motivators such as being a member of a community, serving others, and so on?

I do know that when humans pursue their passions (musicianship, chess, photography, cooking...), the moments of pursuit themselves provide intrinsic motivation, and intrinsic motivation is the healthiest, most sustainable form of motivation. Extrinsic motivators tend to wear thin quickly.

Here's a really good synopsis of very current thinking on motivation:

So if communists are arguing for lives driven by intrinsic motivators, maybe there's something to it?

 

[Sunstone]

I'm fond of the saying, "Where your natural talents (or passions, etc) meet the needs of society is where you will find your happiness in life."

The saying, or variations on it, is often ascribed to Aristotle. But Aristotle said nothing like it. The true author is unknown.

It's been my experience that the saying is true. If you want to leap out of bed at five in the morning every day thirsting to meet the challenges of new day, and ready for anything, then just follow that bit of advice.

 

[siti]

I do know that when humans pursue their passions (musicianship, chess, photography, cooking...), the moments of pursuit themselves provide intrinsic motivation, and intrinsic motivation is the healthiest, most sustainable form of motivation.

And when (if) the intrinsic motivation is a passion for the good health and happiness of humanity...well, if enough people feel that way, the emergence of a genuinely communistic society (in which everyone has enough) will not need to be forced. I live in melioristic hope.

 

[icehorse]

I was just about to link that video in the other thread actually.

I think Linux is a good example of something which is communally developed without economic reward.

Open Source projects are - IMO - really tricky to understand from a motivation perspective. I usually think that contributors to such projects are playing a long game and hoping to reap rewards for their efforts indirectly, down the road. I could be being cynical.

 

[Stevicus]

I have a question for people who subscribe to the economic incentive argument, why do major capitalists keep working?

The world is dominated by capitalists who's profits have been so removed from wealth reality that they would have trouble to spend them on consumable commodities or anything more that would actually benefit their life.

Why do CEO's keep working so long? Why do they pursue profit once they no longer need the sustenance and can live a life of luxury?

It's a good question, and it might be a matter of prestige, recognition, and/or fame. Why does a billionaire like Trump want to be President when the salary for the job is rather meager when compared to that of CEOs or others at that level? Even the perks and potential kickbacks from the job wouldn't be enough to significantly increase Trump's net worth.

That may be the same reason why people pursue wealth and riches. They do so to gain recognition from others (and perhaps a bit of envy). It's why people drive fancy cars, wear expensive clothes, jewelry, etc. They do it to show off to others, for whatever utility or happiness it brings them. It's probably the same with star athletes and celebrities; they don't just want the money, but they also want the accolades, the recognition, the awards, and be thought of as "the best." They want to be number one, as nobody remembers who came in second place.

 

[icehorse]

The video was a summary of a very good book called "Drive". The upshot is that once Maslov's basic needs have been met, people are motivated when they:

- have autonomy
- can pursue mastery
- have purpose

(AMP)

So the open source folks can get AMP in spades. I suspect that most billionaires aren't so healthily motivated, in other words I'm not sure we can apply AMP to trump and many CEOs, those guys feel unhealthy to me.

So @Sartre in your view of a healthy communist society would people be free to pursue things that give them AMP? E.g. would we have symphony orchestras, professional photographers, master chefs, better Linux kernels and so on?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

We were inventing and creating long before Capitalism. If we realistically look at things today, many people do things, such as art and robotics, despite the capitalist/financial payoff being very little to none at all.

 

[icehorse]

We were inventing and creating long before Capitalism. If we realistically look at things today, many people do things, such as art and robotics, despite the capitalist/financial payoff being very little to none at all.

I should clarify - I'm not saying that people are only creative for the payoff, in fact I mostly believe the opposite - I believe in the autonomy, mastery, and purpose model of motivation.

My question had to do more with whether a communist society would welcome and encourage such "non-essential" pursuits?