This month we Word bloggers are to fill in the following blank: "________ may be a great book/in the canon but not for me because..."Difficult...or am I being honest?
So yes, at first I thought this was going to be super difficult. On what grounds would someone deny one of the books in the canon? Wouldn't this inevitably reveal one's shallowness? How could one maintain a pretentious, arrogant air whilst...but then the truth descended upon me like a ton of bricks. The truth is, I once returned a book, a book I've now discovered that quite a few people treasure (there's a pun but you have to wait for it!). I not only returned the book, I proudly and even gleefully returned it. I returned it with the comment that: "I do not understand why this is a Great Book or why ANYONE would ever want to read it!" So what is this most offensive tome?
Adam Smith's The Wealth of Nations
There it is. Take that. And while I'm at it I'd go ahead and ditch all the economists (I struggle some with Locke because of my ridiculous patriotism--hey, I'm an Army brat...). You know what else? I would hold a book burning for Hobbes (not really an economist himself per se, but I think the perfect example of what manifests from economist philosophies). How's that for snapish, brutish and short (you Hobbesians know what I mean!!)?!?!
Because...
On the one level, it's simple: they are boring and UGLY! Let's be real. These are not riveting reads. So if something is requiring discipline to get through, I think there should be a payoff. That's right: tedium is NOT its own reward, and at the end of it I want to better appreciate beauty. I want to be given more reason to stand in awe before my God.
Bare Bones
There it is. The bare bones of the matter. Perhaps I could have articulated a more philosophical lack of appeal or even a spiritual oneupmanship. AKA can we, as Christians seeking God's kingdom, really use economists to undergird our thoughts and behaviors? I know people who say we can and even should, but hmmmmmmm, I wonder...
Okay, so this is overdue but I have to put my two cents in. What about contemporary economists like Steven Levitt or Tim Hartford, authors of "Freakonomics" and "The Undercover Economist" respectively. (Or Paul Krugman, if that floats your boat.) Economic thought is definitely not light reading, but the tools it teaches can be applied to almost anything, even our spiritual lives. Economics is the study of valuation and decision-making. (Cost-benefit analysis, anyone?)
ReplyDeleteI'll use a recent debate about happiness on the Economist magazine's website, as an example. Two scholars were debating on whether the general well-being of a nation should be the primary aim of policymaking rather than Gross Domestic Product. Most people voted yes, general well-being should be most important, but this gets me wondering how Apostolic/Pentecostals value well-being.
If everything is going well in our lives (financially, emotionally, etc.), are we more likely to be more obedient, prayerful, and such? How about when things aren't going well? And if our spiritual lives changes because of earthly well-being, then what exactly are we valuing more?
It's a value question and therefore an economic question.
By the way, "Freakonomics" or its sequel "SuperFreakonomics" are delightful, easy reads about economics that I'd highly suggest you look up. Tim Hartford has a new book called "Adapt: Success in the Face of Failure" that sounds like a pretty good read too.
Amanda,
ReplyDelete1. I am glad you exist.
2. I re-read my post and must concede that I have excessively overstated things in my utter petulance.
3. You are right! "Economics is the study of valuation and decision making" and as such can absolutely and effectively be applied to spiritual life (parable of building the tower alludes to this as well).
4. Anyway, thank you for your corrective thoughts and comments. As they say, better late than never!
5. And I reiterate, I am glad you exist!!