What Are Pilkington’s Criticisms of “marginal Utility”?

1. What are Pilkington’s criticisms of “marginal utility”?

Pilkington criticizes that marginal utility is a “fundamentally irrational action that has nothing to do with utility maximization.” Because it is the weighting up of price against utility, while there is the theory of how people should behave, we actually act in a completely different, usually behavioral way.

2. What examples does he give?

The author uses grocery shopping for his examples. He explains that people do not consciously trade off prices for greater time spent or similar benefits as neoclassical theory would conclude. Rather, we act on whims when we shop, often letting many variables like consumer desire, or changing social and psychological realities dictate our behavior. This is why utility does not exist as there are no fixed numbers of one good to be compared to another. One of his more prominent examples is buying donuts just because there is a special offer. Rather than seeing if the special offer fact checks against previous donut prices, we couldn’t care less about checking the price because the idea of saving money is satisfying enough.

3. Do your experiences match his, or are you more of a neoclassical shopper?

His experience definitely matches my own. There is never any real research done before a grocery run or clothes for that matter. Unless the price is widely apparent (as his was with coffee), we both tend to rally to satisfaction rather than proving if an option is really better. For example, I bought a “Christmas Sale” Invicta watch at 75% off. Upon realizing a year later that that specific watch is always on “sale” for the same price, I conclude I tend to side with his experiences of desire than that of a neoclassical shopper.

4. Do his arguments mean we shouldn’t learn