Economics as a Social Science: An Approach to Nonautistic Theory

Notes

Notes Chapter 1 1. Autistic behavior is not restricted to economists. Note, for example, the following statement by Venant Cauchy, honorary president of the International Federation of Philosophical Societies: “What strikes me as particularly worrisome in many areas of philosophical activity is the relative lack of relevance, even the refusal of relevance in the face of the fundamental social, economic, political, ethical, and technological problems which confront us today. The relative impotence or inability to cope signi‹cantly with the issues, the tendency to view philosophy as a game or a mere formal exercise, is very worrisome indeed” (quoted in Stoehr 1998, 31). 2. According to Barro’s theory, an individual chooses a path of consumption and a bequest to the next generation by maximizing a utility function that has as its argument the individual’s own annual consumption amounts and the utility of the next generation . A tax cut matched by a rise in the national debt to be serviced by taxes on future generations does not change the opportunity set of the individual. He or she maintains a consumption path and the utility level of the next generation by saving the whole of the tax cut, investing it, and leaving it to the next generation. This allows the next generation to maintain its consumption path and look out for its heirs. The process results in ‹nite-lived individuals being equivalent to in‹nitely long-lived individuals (Barro 1974; Feldstein 1988). John J. Seater ‹nds exact Ricardian equivalence implausible (1993, 143) and believes that it requires too many stringent conditions to be believable (184), but he still accepts the articles supportive of it, rejects those opposed, and concludes that it is an attractive model of government debt’s effects on economic activity (184). I can only echo James Tobin’s question voiced on a similar occasion: “Why do so many talented economic theorists believe . . . elegant fantasies so obviously refutable by plainly obvious facts?” (1992, 400). 3. See Kamarck 2001. Chapter 2 1. Der Mangel an mathematischer Bildung gibt sich durch nichts so aufallend zu erkennen, wie durch masslose Schaerfe im Zahlenrechnen. 2. In economic jargon,”the combined assumptions of maximizing behavior, market equilibrium and stable preferences, used relentlessly and un›inchingly . . . provides 177 a valuable uni‹ed framework for understanding all human behavior” (Becker 1976, 5, 14, emphasis in original; quoted in Elster 1989, 105). Economics megalomania is not unique. Compare this statement: “Unfortunately, psychology as a profession tends to assume that all questions about human action fall within its domain and that all can be eventually answered with the authority of science—this imperialism has gone largely unquestioned” (Staddon 1995, 88–89). 3. The following discussion draws heavily on Kamarck 2000. 4. See Kamarck 2001 for a development of this approach. Chapter 3 1. That I might understand what / in ‹nal analysis holds the world together. 2. This translates into English as: “It is the social constraint, pure and simple. Society wills that men suffer and die at the front. Therefore they suffer and they die. That’s it. . . . The fear that man has of society is much stronger than the fear he has of shells. Their fear of society isn’t physical. It is intangible. Man is so made that for him a physical fear is almost always less strong than an intangible fear. The intangible fear of society knows how to take on forms that have an immediate effect in themselves. On one side, fear of shells. But on the other side, the fear of what your comrades or your commander will think, or if you are a commander what your men will think. It takes in one sense more courage for the average man to face up to a reputation of cowardice than to endure an explosion of shells.” Another reason for overriding self-interest by a soldier was illustrated by the letter , quoted by Ken Burns in his Civil War television series, that Major Sullivan Ballou, a Union of‹cer, wrote to his wife. I have no misgivings about, or lack of con‹dence in, the cause in which I am engaged, and my courage does not halt or falter. I know how the triumph of American civilization now leans upon the triumph of the government, and how great a debt we owe to those who went before us through the blood and suffering of the Revolution; and I am willing, perfectly willing, to lay down all my joys in this life to help...