pro libertate net

Peter Boettke’s Living Economics is an excellent collection of essays on the history of (austrian) economic thought and thinkers together with some more general remarks on the teaching and practice of economics.

As Boettke often summarizes the contribution to economics of a scholar’s whole lifetime in only a few pages Living Economics requires (and deserves) the reader’s undivided attention. (I have to admit that – I hope it was just due to me having a cold – I had to reread a few passages to fully grasp them.) It is well worth it and the reader is likely to be rewarded. It is obvious how passionate Boettke is about his profession.

I like the distinction between mainline and mainstream economics which allows Boettke to show the connections of the austrian school to other streams of economics that follow the same or closely related lines, pulling the different streams closer together.

Yet, I would have prefered a more monolithic book. As it is a collection of essays there are some repetitions and the transitions between chapters (i.e. the essays) was often quite abrupt. On the other hand, this allowed me to put the book aside after an essay more easily and ponder on what I had just learned.

Despite its title James Rollins’ Altar of Eden is not even close to the religiously themed novels of Dan Brown and others. It is a science thriller, an action adventure, no supernatural mysteries here.

Rollins is a seasoned writer and there is very little about the novel that I did not like. The pre-story is too short. It should have been much longer, going into greater depth (Cussler seems to have found a good length for his setting of the stage), or it shouldn’t be there at all. There is also one sub-plot and its villain, in particular the villain, that I am not fond of. The sub-plot adds nicely to the character building of the heroine. The re-appearance of the sub-plots villain, however, is too much of a coincident and it does not add anything to the entertainment value of the novel.

That said, the novel was highly entertaining, gripping as a thriller should be.

“The plural of anecdote is not data.” This is a quote from Dawkin’s The God Delusion making the case for a more scientific approach to Life, the Universe and Everything. Unfortunately most of his points are supported by just these anecdotes. There is also a lot of name dropping as if a point (generalizing to all members of a group) becomes more valid if a more prominent representative of a group can be shown as an example.

At one point he concedes that he, from that point on, has to use rhetoric rather than logic to make his case. That came as a bit of a surprise: In my opinion he relies mostly on rhetoric in his book and very little on explicitly applied logic. Many things seem so obviously evident to him that he does not spell them out. I missed that. I would have needed it. The God Delusion lacks the brilliance of The Selfish Gene. Dawkins jumps from point to point without discussing them in sufficient depth, ultimately failing to convince, sometimes rambling on minor issues, getting side-tracked, and losing the reader: me.

I agree with Dawkins on most issues. We do not need religion as a moral guide. There is undeserved respect towards religion. Religion and science do not mix (well). Most importantly, the mental abuse, the indoctrination of easily impressed children that is part of religious upbringing is bad, bad, bad. I agreed with him on these points before I read the God Delusion not because of it.

For some it may be utopia for others it is dystopia what Vernor Vinge pictures our society may look like in just a few years. Rainbows End offers an account of what technological (and medical) progress can mean for society and the individual.

There are several themes, though not necessarily original all of them are thought provoking. There is the “who watches the watchmen” theme in a world where computing power and interconnectedness allows the monitoring, profiling, and manipulation of individuals and crowds in real time. There is the advancement of personalized medicine and its failure to be beneficial for everyone to the same degree. There is the “smart devices and dumb people” theme (or should I say differently skilled people?); the technological progress puts a high toll on the older generation whose skills become obsolete (and subsequently needs a re-education to fit in the new world) and a high toll on the younger generation who lacks basic skills of today’s world. And there is the sad escape from reality into the virtual world, many distinct virtual worlds leading to a segmentation of society, a living side by side without a living with another.

Vinge’s novel is not an easy read and many things remain open, questions unanswered. Yet, this just contributes to a certain feeling of satisfaction: the novel not just entertains it makes you think. Well done!

The most recent financial and economics crisis raised some serious concern about the usefulness of economics, its research agenda, and what and how it is taught at universities. Almost no one did see the crisis coming. And looking at Europe, there seems to be no perfect consensus on what are the best policy measures. (Admittedly, what is best depends on the goals and different policy recommendations may be a result of a difference in goals.)
Last year, in February 2012, there was a small conference on teaching economics after the crisis. “What’s the Use of Economics?” is a kind of conference proceedings, a selection of short essays assessing the current state, the need for change, and possible routes for change by various attendants edited by Diane Coyle.

Of course, some of the essays are more and some are less useful; overall the book is just excellent.

One recurrent theme is the lack of historical knowledge imparted by most current economics programs. While I would be a fan of more (or at least, say, one) courses in the history of economic thought the authors would rather stress the importance of economic history. I can agree with that – as long as these course do not degenerate into some applied econometrics courses; they are great, too, yet not what is needed here.

A second notable theme concerns employability. What is taught in many programs is not necessarily what non-academic economists will need in their jobs. I also tend to agree here. Guilty as charged (even though I teach in a multidisciplinary program; a more multidisciplinary approach is also recommended in the book). Though this is, of course, a result of our self perception as academic economists: Do we train future academic researchers or ‘mere’ government economist? I guess most of us prefer to think – or hope – it is the first. The truth is mostly different and therefore there is indeed the need for some changes in the curriculum.

I hate it when some sloppy editing bereaves me of enjoying an otherwise good novel.

I do not think that Polar Shift would get the WAS seal of approval. While freak waves are a fact, inducing a polar shift by directing some electromagnetic fields to a “weak spot” on ocean is most certainly not. Yet, that is not what I meant with sloppy editing. It’s part of the story’s plot. A necessary device to allow the hero to not just save the damsel in distress but to save the whole world from Armageddon.

Sloppy editing manifests in repeating specific words or phrases several times, be at the “cantankerous” whatever or a description that is first used by the narrator and then by one of the novel’s characters just a few pages later. Sloppy editing is also transliterating an umlaut in one name so that Schröder becomes Schroeder, keeping the umlaut in one word, e.g. “Leigerkapitän” but not in all other words like names of places like Kitzbühel, Austria. Admittedly this is just some minor inconsistency and oversight. Still it tells a lot about how authors and editor cared.

Luckily everything else is ok. The standard stereotypes work just fine and the novel is well paced.

The Kurt Austin novels have always a “moral” or “good cause” as part of their background story. This time it is (the fight against) globalization and evil elites that concentrate power by controlling information flows. Not too original. Though it fits the “just fine” overall impression.