They Each Got Something "Right"

After having read Hillary and Sarah's comments about economics and science, I thought to myself how nowadays, there are no books about the many scientists who attempted to solve the question of gravity, light and momentum, but rather, there is a biography or recognition of the ONE scientist who succeeded in figuring out each scientific mystery. Although the process of figuring out economics (and philosophy!!) is similar to the scientific processes of testing and retesting, it is clear that the world as a whole is not hell-bent on any particular economic argument, but rather, depending on the era and the society, bits and pieces of all of these economic philosophers are taken to address economic challenges and policies of our time. (Hence the peanut gallery comments "that was very Marxist of you" or "that was a Smith-like self-interest and competitive idea".) Unfortunately, things aren't black and white, but I guess that's what we are used to in PPE...constantly questioning the world and striving for answers.

This being said, I think it is going to be interesting to watch us pull aspects of these economists' arguments throughout this class into our own arguments. I think each philosopher had portions of their arguments that were absolutely absurd but other parts that made me think "Yeah, they all seem to have something that seems 'right'" (Some more than others I might add.) But then again, who is the judge of what is right and wrong here? There are some economic truths (supply and demand etc), but the right and wrong answers of which economic policies work are not necessarily black and white when they are first enacted.

Although I do not agree with all of the Utopian Socialist Robert Owen's, beliefs, I do agree that a solution to the poverty problem is helping to make the poor productive (111). Even in today's world, we have found that giving large amounts of money to poverty-stricken countries and corrupt governments does not yield the ideal results the donating governments/organizations would like to see. Rather, money spent on methods such as micro-financing and education have proven to be more effective in addressing the poverty problem than tossing over the big buck and hoping they know what to do with it.

Despite many of Owen's ideas being ignored (i.e. The Villages of Cooperation and distrust of money), some still have a presence today and can be influential in the way economic policies are devised. This just goes to show that we can take parts of these economists' arguments and adapt them to how we approach today's complex economy. Although the economy will never be black and white like some scientific laws, it will continue to be tested through various policies that will help address the economic problems of our time and ensure economic happiness for the greatest number (that is, if you have some utilitarian preferences).

I am especially excited to have a better understanding of each philosopher's view. I've had exposure them in past classes but in very different contexts. Overall, (and I know Max would agree) this book was extremely interesting and a good read. It will be a great foundation for what is to come and it is (I will agree with sarah) "truly a PPE Book."