I just started a new book called freakonomics. I have no recollection of how it came to my attention but it's been sitting in my amazon shopping cart for a few weeks now and then I discovered it was available at the MS library. I have no recollection of how I discovered this either but it just happened.
So I checked out the book, and I'd just laid it down right now after reading the table of contents and introduction.
Of course, I do not mean this as a book review because obviously I hadn't read enough of it yet and secondly I will probably suck at writing a review.
There is however this phrase that really caught my attention:
Morality, it could be argued, represents the way that people would like the world to work--whereas economics represents how it actually _does_ work
Now how about that as food for thought....
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Well, I do agree the sentence is eye catching, but I am not sure I totally agree with it..I mean u can't compare morality with economics, I believe. Morality definitely can be argued & morals differ from one person to another. Economics is more factual..but still they are two different sets of rules.
IMHO, the first set; morality, is about right & wrong, beliefs and concepts. The latter, is by definition, a science. Morality is not a sceince.
It would be like comparing a chocolate bar to a sleeping pill...see they are both intakes, but u can't compare them. U cant say "a chocolate bar keeps u awake & puts u in a good mood, but, the sleeping pill makes u dizzy & puts u to sleep".
The book does seem interesting though & i am now really eager to find it :D tell me what u think of it when u finish it :)
I forgot to add this to my comment: it's true that they are sometimes inversely proprtional, like a friend of mine would put it. For some ppl, economics control them, rather than ethics & with others morals rule, rather than econmoics. I reject the idea of one dominating over the other, however, it's the way some ppl see it...I hope i have made my opinion clearer
yeah you did. But see, even in your comment, there is a phrase that actually enforces the idea.
You said:
I reject the idea of one dominating over the other
Isn't this exactly what it's about? We "like" to think it's moralities, even when it is in fact economics controlling how the world works....
True, on the micro level, this could be regarded as an exaggeration. But I think there is still truth in it. AndI still find the concept intriguing.
I tend to agree with the statement. Economics is Science while Morality is a mirage which reflects the statement. Economics is how it works. Morality is how we wish it works. Economics is the barren desert. Morality is that illusion of water.
Wars were waged to drain other nations resources.Peace is struck to preserve them now that there are other means to control a nation.
Morality is what keeps going. Without the mirage, you'd just lay down in the desert and die
Been long ya Duke, welcome back :)
So we still chase the mirage even when we _know_ it's a mirage?
Do we believe in things because we need to believe? Not because we actually have faith in their truth?
Post a Comment