[pbhjpbhj]

>"Furthermore, the best approximation to human behaviour I know is that human beings will do whatever it takes to maximise ... not their wealth, not their freedom, but... their status."

// Many people choose to take on a lower "status" though.

Chasing "the good life" or "down-sizing" for example.

This is, to my mind at least, a hankering for something more meaningful than financial acumen or societal position.

[hugh3]

Well of course the great part and the worst flaw of my status-maximization theory is that it can't be disproved. The guy who gives up a high-paying job in finance to go become a starving artist is arguably maximising his status ("Oooh look at that guy following his dream and not caring about money") and so is the guy who makes the reverse decision ("Being an artist is for try-hard suckers, look at my money!").

It's hard to find an example of someone unambiguously lowering their own status, since voluntarily lowering your status in order to achieve some other aim can be, in itself, a status-raising activity.

[pbhjpbhj]

It appears you're messing with your definition of status in order to make such statements. Could you give a succinct definition of what you mean by "status"?

Status is defined by the general populus, others define your status, your place in the "pecking order". People regarding your actions as positive ('following his dream, blah blah') doesn't mean your status is increased.

"a starving artist is arguably maximising his status"

Yes, it depends on your definition of status .. so ...

[kd0amg]

Yeah, it all comes down to what you consider "status." Independence and high economic/societal position are not the same thing.

"If I were not Alexander, I would be Diogenes."