Economics

[Tannin]

Just so, Nomadjack. If by some magic we were all turned into the rationally calculating utility maximisers economists base all their theory on, most of the best-selling consumer product manufacturers would go broke by the end of the week.

The sheer dumbfounding irrationality of the typical consumer is quite mind-blowing. The really weird thing about this is that the highly intellectual economists who claim to understand how and why the whole thing works haven't got the faintest clue how people actually tick, whereas the dum-dums who failed economics and went into marketing or sales or accounting don't know or care why or even how an economy works, but they are very, very good at understanding and manipulating people.

Go figure.

[Wokko]

Just read the Wealth of Nations and then move on to more important things.

[Tannin]

Oh, don't be too dismissive of Smith, Wokko. Yes, we have moved on a long, long way since Uncle Adam's day - well, most of us have, more than a few economists are still back there in 1776, but they are a little slow on the uptake some of them - but his fundamental thesis was ground-breaking in its day, was massively influential over the following century and formed one of the fundamental building blocks on which great men like Marx and Mill built structures which endure to this day and will long into the future, and still remains essential reading.*

I said very rude things about the mindless application of Smith's invisible hand a little earlier; nevertheless it would be as great a mistake to ignore it as it is to worship it exclusively to the exclusion of all others.

Smith's blunt implement makes a lousy screwdriver but it's still a very good hammer.

* I doubt that you need to read it in the original. I've read about half of it and didn't feel I'd gained anything much that I hadn't gained already from precis and recapitulations. Compare with later, more developed workers like Marx and Mill, both of whom should certainly be read in the original. (For their key works only, as a rule. No need to wade all the way through Utilitarianism or Capital unless you have a particular reason to, but On Liberty and the preface to A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy are both essential reading without which no-one could call himself educated. (Neither one is difficult to read - sometimes the very best ideas are expressed quite simply.)

[Wokko]

I actually mean it, the basic fundamentals of free market economics are laid out pretty plainly. Philosophy and economics are pretty close relatives.

[Tannin]

(I expanded my earlier post via edit)

I did think about replying to your philosophy and economics point. Then I decided that I didn't have a spare lifetime lying around to spend on that topic, so I'd do better to let that one go through to the keeper.

[pietillidie]

[Wokko]

If I'm reading Das Kapital then you're reading Atlas Shrugged (even I didn't finish it, she made her point by 1/3 of the way through then devolved into rape fantasy).

[David]

I don't want to be a generational stereotype, but when I saw Atlas Shrugged on a bookshelf, my first thought was "wow, that's a thick book". My next thought was "wow, that's really small font". My third thought was "I am never, ever going to manage to read this".