4 ms·
Hmm, the finance/economics divide is reminding me somewhat of the morality/legal divide. It's tempting to look at the idea of basing all your decisions about vi
by Tycho 15y ago
Hmm, the finance/economics divide is reminding me somewhat of the morality/legal divide. It's tempting to look at the idea of basing all your decisions about viable strategies on hard finance data as being akin to basing all your moral judgement on whether an action aligned with current laws. The latter seems obviously flawed, but at least it offers some degree of empirical certainty - whereas nobody can actually agree on a standard of morality (there are many differing philosophies etc.).
- dxbydt 15y agoThere's a beautiful, beautifully argued book by Martin Gardner ( http://www.amazon.com/Whys-Philosophical-Scrivener-Martin-Gardner/dp/0312206828 http://www.amazon.com/Whys-Philosophical-Scrivener-Martin-Ga... ). There are 2 chapters on economics in that book, one on free market capitalism ( "why i'm not a smithian" ), one on i guess you could call it lite-obamaism ( "why i'm not a marxist" ). Gardner rejects both. He works out some math behind their assumptions. Then states his moral objections to both of them. I used to think Martin Gardner was a giant puzzle-master with super high IQ. After reading that book, I discovered a thinking, anxious, doubtful, religious, deeply charitable & generous human being. To date, it remains my favorite Gardner book. Do check it out, I think you'll love it. The rest of the book documents Gardner's careful rejection of all of the popular philosophies ( solipsism, anarchism, polytheism, monotheism, relativism, pantheism, determinism etc. ). Its a monumental piece of work.