It was selfish, if you want to think of it that way. He was simply more concerned about how Tom and Katie (and perhaps the audience) felt about him than he was about the money. He paid to restore his honor. In economic terms, he exchanged money for something that was more valuable to him. I've you don't see any value in honor and the respect of others, then I can see where that might be difficult to understand.
I just couldn't put my finger on Ian's true motivation.
It must be amazingly easy to fit everyone's decisions into your worldview if you exclude any explanations that don't fit your worldview and look for the "true" explanation that more neatly fits. So you know what was going on in Ian's head better than he did and would rather call him a liar than accept his simple explanation that explains his behavior quite well?
So you know what was going on in Ian's head better than he did and would rather call him a liar than accept his simple explanation that explains his behavior quite well?
I never used the word "liar" in reference to Ian. I'm just Questioning Assumptions. Do you work for Newsweek?