Category Archives: Great Thinkers

Fun Fact of the Day

A lot of people like to make fun of the French. I don’t. France’s intellectual heritage is among the world’s finest. Even though contemp0rary politics there are decidedly illiberal, France was home to many of liberalism’s brightest lights.

The French Enlightenment gave the world Diderot, the encyclopedist; Voltaire, the conscience of Europe; Montesquieu’s grand narratives of history; Helvetius’ pre-Bentham utilitarianism; and Condorcet’s infinitely perfectible man. And that’s just for starters.

Economists everywhere owe a huge debt to the Physiocrats, especially Turgot and Quesnay, for what they taught a young Adam Smith when he traveled to France. Many of their lessons found their way into the Wealth of Nations. Bastiat, 160 years after his death, remains one of the discipline’s sharpest wits and most effective popularizers.

Add to that the deliciousness of French food and the fact that Gojira, one of my favorite metal bands, hails from Bayonne (video below), and the dramatic achievements of Corneille and Racine, and one can see why I think the French don’t deserve to be the butt of so many jokes.

Which brings me to today’s fun fact: the world’s first academic journal exclusively devoted to economics was founded in France. The Journal Oeconomique was founded in 1751, a full quarter of a century before the Wealth of Nations was published in 1776. Other pre-Smithian economics journals included the Gazette du Commerce and the Journal de l’Agriculture, du Commerce et des Finances.

Something to keep in mind next time you crack a joke about France.

Schumpeter on Why People Are Bad at Arguing

It’s because people rely on ad hominems and straw-man arguments. These leave the opponents’ actual arguments untouched, and resolve nothing.

So true is it that, in science as elsewhere, we fight for and against not men and things as they are, but for and against the caricatures we make of them.

-Joseph Schumpter, History of Economic Analysis, p. 90.

Schumpeter on Ideology

Schumpeter believed that, because people are fallible creatures, even the scientific method isn’t entirely objective. Ideology is reflected in, say, a scientist’s (or an economist’s) choice to research one topic instead of another, or the patterns they find (or miss) while interpreting the data:

“It embodies the picture of things as we see them, and wherever there is any possible motive for wishing to see them in a given rather than another light, the way in which we see things can hardly be distinguished from the way we wish to see them.”

-Joseph Schumpeter, History of Economic Analysis, p. 42

Adam Smith on the New Tone

“The furious behavior of an angry man is more likely to exasperate us against himself than against his enemies.”

-Adam Smith, Theory of Moral Sentiments

Erasmus on Thinking for One’s Self

Erasmus opens In Praise of Folly with a letter to Thomas More, author of Utopia. They became good friends when Erasmus stayed in England. He gave More this bit of praise:

“[S]uch is the excellence of your judgment that it was ever contrary to that of the people’s.”

Indeed.

Setting a New Tone

People complain that the level of political discourse in America is lower than ever. That isn’t actually true if you look at the historical record. But the ratio of heat to light is still far too high.

Over at the Daily Caller, I share a bit of wisdom from the economist Joseph Schumpeter about how people can have a more constructive dialogue about the direction of the country.

The Wealth of Nations Turns 235

Adam Smith’s An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations was published 235 years ago today.

Over at Cafe Hayek, Russ Roberts links to a few short resources about that long, long book (which I nonetheless recommend reading). Worth checking out.

Here’s to You, Doug Rogers

One of the most selfish pleasures I’ve taken away from my time in George Mason University’s economics department is witnessing the accomplishments of the people I got to know there. Reading a former professor’s book, seeing a fellow grad student’s paper in a journal, or reading their op-eds and blog posts brings me endless delight.

That pleasure will be denied me with Doug Rogers. He was one of the best friends I made during that time. He passed away on January 30 in a car accident. He was 26. Right in the prime of life.

What a shame then, that the world will be denied his achievements. He was well on his way to becoming a fine economist. Scratch that. He already was a fine economist. For a quick example of the clarity and principle of his thought, see this article on the economics of prohibition that he authored for a recent issue of The Freeman, published by the Foundation for Economic Education.

We met in Peter Leeson’s class in development economics. For the uninitiated, development economics attempts to answer why some countries are rich while others are poor, and how poor countries can become rich. In short, one of this century’s defining issues. Class discussion often grew heated as a result. Doug was the class’ voice of reason.

There were radical free-market types in the room, and their opposites. Doug made no bones about siding with the former. But he never lost sight of the fact that both sides agree on ends, even when they disagree on means. The world would be a better place if more people shared Doug’s simple insight.

He also noticed that I would often wear a Green Bay Packers hat to class. After class one day, he asked if I played football. It turned out that Doug and some other grad students got together on weekends to play touch football. I grew up playing baseball, and had hardly touched a football in my life. But softball season was over by this time of year, and football seemed a more appealing way to get some exercise than the tedium of a gym. So I lied and said yes.

Lies rarely turn out well. This one did. I still come out most weeks, despite having graduated almost two years ago. The games themselves are fun enough. But the real treat is that I got to know a whole cast of characters who I am proud to call my friends.

Doug was definitely the leader of the gang. More often than not, he would send out the weekly emails to gauge attendance. He would get things started once we reached a quorum. He would call the plays in the huddle. Good ones, too. If you were playing receiver, you wanted Doug to be your quarterback. If you were defending against him, Doug was the last guy you wanted to cover.

When everyone’s endurance was flagging, Doug would promise to buy everyone burgers from Five Guys if we’d just play one more game. First team to score three touchdowns wins. It’ll be quick. So of course, we’d play. And everyone’s sides would be heaving with exhaustion by the time that third touchdown finally came. Then he’d flash a smile and say he was just kidding about the burgers. This was a regular enough occurrence that the group came up with a word for it: getting Dougled.

Then January 30, 2011 happened. No more reading Doug’s articles. More importantly, no more getting Dougled. I suspect our weekend football group will continue. If it doesn’t, so it goes. But if it does, it won’t ever be the same. The world of ideas will continue on as it ever did. But for the next half century or more, it will be missing an important voice. My life is far from the only one that will be left poorer by Doug’s death.

I don’t have any religious beliefs. But when I get to know a good person, I do have the habit of describing them as a good soul. Doug was a good soul. I will miss seeing what he would have accomplished had he lived longer. But more than that, I will miss him just being around. Here’s to you, friend. You’ll be missed. In fact, you already are.

The Wisdom of Philosophers

“There is nothing so absurd which has not sometimes been asserted by some philosophers.”

-Cicero, De Divinatione, ii, 58.

What “International Tax Harmonization” Means

“There is no art which one government sooner learns of another, than that of draining money from the pockets of the people.”

-Adam Smith, The Wealth of Nations, p. 929.