Editing Homo economicus (section)

===Sociologists===

Another weakness is highlighted by economic sociologists, who argue that ''Homo economicus'' ignores an extremely important question, i.e. the origins of tastes and the parameters of the utility function by social influences, training, education, and the like. The exogeneity of tastes (preferences) in this model is the major distinction from ''[[Homo sociologicus]],'' in which tastes are taken as partially or even totally determined by the societal environment. Comparisons between economics and sociology have resulted in a corresponding term ''Homo sociologicus'', introduced by German sociologist [[Ralf Dahrendorf]] in 1958, to parody the image of human nature given in some sociological models that attempt to limit the social forces that determine individual tastes and social values.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Dahrendorf |first1=Ralf |title=Homo Sociologicus: ein Versuch zur Geschichte, Bedeutung und Kritik der Kategorie der sozialen Rolle. |date=1965 |publisher=Westdeutscher Verlag |location=Köln/Opladen}}</ref> (The alternative or additional source of these would be biology.) Hirsch ''et al.'' say that ''Homo sociologicus'' is largely a ''[[tabula rasa]]'' upon which societies and cultures write values and goals; unlike ''economicus'', ''sociologicus'' acts not to pursue selfish interests but to fulfill social roles<ref>Hirsch, Paul, Stuart Michaels and Ray Friedman. 1990. "Clean Models vs. Dirty Hands: Why Economics Is Different from Sociology." In Sharon Zukin and Paul DiMaggio, eds. ''Structures of Capital: The Social Organization of the Economy'': 39–56. Cambridge; New York and Melbourne: Cambridge University Press, 1990 ({{ISBN|0-521-37523-1}})</ref> (though the fulfillment of social roles may have a selfish rationale—e.g. politicians or [[socialite]]s). This "individual" may appear to be all society and no individual.

The as of 2015 emerging science of "[[neuroeconomics]]" suggests that there are serious shortcomings in the conventional theories of economic rationality.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Schmitz | first1 = Sigrid | last2 = Köeszegi | first2 = Sabine T. | last3 = Enzenhofer | first3 = Bettina | last4 = Harrer | first4 = Christine | author-link1 = Sigrid Schmitz | title = Quo vadis Homo economicus? References to rationality/emotionality in neuroeconomic discourses | journal = Recent Notes on Labor Science and Organization | publisher = University of Vienna (Universität Wien) | url = http://repositum.tuwien.ac.at/obvutwoa/content/titleinfo/1006477 | date = 2015 | volume = 2015,2 }} [http://repositum.tuwien.ac.at/obvutwoa/download/pdf/1006477 Pdf.]</ref> Rational economic decision making has been shown to produce high levels of [[cortisol]], [[epinephrine]] and [[corticosteroid]]s, associated with elevated levels of stress.  It seems that the dopaminic system is only activated upon achieving the reward, and otherwise the "pain" receptors, particularly in the [[prefrontal cortex]] of the left hemisphere of the brain show a high level of activation.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Rilling | first1 = J.K. | last2 = Sanfey | first2 = A.G. | last3 = Aronson | first3 = J.A. | last4 = Nystrom | first4 = L.E. | last5 = Cohen | first5 = J.D. | year = 2004 | title = Opposing BOLD responses to reciprocated and unreciprocated altruism in putative reward pathways | journal = NeuroReport | volume = 15 | issue = 16| pages = 2539–2543 | doi = 10.1097/00001756-200411150-00022 | pmid = 15538191 | s2cid = 13127406 }}</ref>  [[Serotonin]] and [[oxytocin]] levels are minimised, and the general immune system shows a level of suppression.  Such a pattern is associated with a generalised reduction in the levels of trust.  Unsolicited "gift giving", considered irrational from the point of view of ''Homo economicus'', by comparison, shows an elevated stimulation of the pleasure circuits of the whole brain, reduction in the levels of stress, optimal functioning of the immune system, reduction in cortico-steroids and epinephrine and cortisol, activation of the [[substantia nigra]], the [[striatum]] and the [[nucleus accumbens]] (associated with the [[placebo effect]]), all associated with the building of social trust.  [[Mirror neuron]]s result in a [[win-win]] [[positive sum game]] in which the person giving the gift receives a pleasure equivalent to the person receiving it.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Kosfeld | first1 = M. | last2 = Heinrichs | first2 = M | last3 = Zak | first3 = P.J. | last4 = Fischbacher | first4 = U. | last5 = Fehr | first5 = E. | year = 2005 | title = Oxytocin increases trust in humans | url = https://archive-ouverte.unige.ch/unige:101739| journal = Nature | volume = 435 | issue = 7042| pages = 673–676 | doi = 10.1038/nature03701 | pmid = 15931222 | bibcode = 2005Natur.435..673K | s2cid = 1234727 }}</ref> This confirms the findings of anthropology which suggest that a "[[gift economy]]" preceded the more recent market systems where win-lose or risk-avoidance lose-lose calculations apply.<ref>Bowles, Samuel and Herbert Gintis "A Cooperative Species: Human Reciprocity and its Evolution" (Princeton University Press; Reprint edition)</ref>