Arthur Robson (Simon Fraser University)
Abstract. Why did evolution not give us a utility function that is simply (quality adjusted) offspring, with no other arguments? Why do we care intrinsically about other outcomes, food, for example, and what determines the intensity of such preferences? A common view is that such other outcomes enhance fitness and the intensity of our preference for a given outcome reflects its contribution to fitness. We argue that this view is inaccurate. Specifically, we show that an argument will appear in utility when individuals are ignorant of its role in promoting fitness, despite its effect having been established by a long evolutionary history. Our model sheds light on imitation and prepared learning, whereby some peer attitudes are more influential than others. The key testable implications of the model concern systematically biased choices in modern times in which individuals are less ignorant. Most notably, we apply the model to help explain the demographic transition