Of course, if a cow were to use a tool, it would be a Brown Swiss.
www.nytimes.com/2026/01/19/s...
Of course, if a cow were to use a tool, it would be a Brown Swiss.
www.nytimes.com/2026/01/19/s...
We never see βanti-selfβ or βself-sacrificialβ models in economics because theyβd break the disciplineβs moral boundary, namely that every act, however generous, must still fit inside the logic of self-interested utility.
Economists love the term βprosocial.β It sounds generous, but notice we never say βself-sacrificing.β The word smuggles in an optimism that helping others can be good for them without ever really being bad for you.
"Wilson wants economists to reject narrow cause-and-effect arguments because they obscure human purpose and meaning behind action."
www.independent.org/tir/2025-fal...
Iβve written a short essay on the philosophy of economic science, titled βConstrained Optimization or Observation? On What Economists Take as Primary.β This is just a beginning, and Iβm keen to hear counterpoints as I continue down this path.
Monkeys, markets, and human nature β I join The Great Antidote with Juliette Sellgren to talk about how deep the roots of economics really are.
loom.ly/I6Gdk3Q
I would add that the calling of the university isnβt just about witnessing truth, but also discovering whatβs good and beautiful about the human condition. These three distinct values compose a trinity that is necessary to be faithful and courageous to the calling.
crookedtimber.org/2025/03/22/o...
Pretty much sums up Homo sapiens
Late-stage capitalism: when the stock exchange becomes theatre
it tends to set the reader himself in the track of invention, and to direct him into those paths in which the author has made his own discoveries, if he should be so happy as to have made any that are valuable.β
~Edmund Burke
βI am convinced that the method of teaching which approaches most nearly to the method of investigation is incomparably the best; since not content with serving up a few barren and lifeless truths, it leads to the stock on which they grew;
In "Meaningful Economics", I argue that economics is as much about purposes and human values as it is about cost-benefit analysis, reframing economic science as a question of "why?" and not merely "how?" or "how much?".
Find out more: oxford.ly/41IGv52
Are we just rats in a cage, chasing immediate rewards? What if economics recognized usβnot just as reactive creatures, but as imaginative, purposeful beings?
oxford.ly/4h5T8M2
Why did Homo sapiens become rich? Economists generally leave it to historians, and to a relatively small handful of them at that, to ponder such an important question. Maybe they need us non-historians to mix things up for them.
www.sciencedirect.com/science/arti...
OUP is offering 30% discount for "Meaningful Economics" if you buy it directly from them using the code AUFLY30.
global.oup.com/academic/pro...
Or, on why economists might should want to reflect on why we think the way we do
If there is something that almost all economists agree on, itβs that economics is about cost-benefit analysis, not moral human conduct. But why? Why must we separate economics and ethics such that never the twain shall meet?
blog.oup.com/2024/12/mean...
The Kindle version of my book is released today!
www.amazon.com/Meaningful-E...
My book is available for pre-order!
www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/0197...
I agree that it isnβt constructive to conclude that there are no benefits to math in economic analysis. But I rarely hear us economists admit or even acknowledge that there are indeed costs, not just benefits, of pursuing mathematical precision.
What if words, in fact, are not on a continuum with maths? They may share some underlying structures, but they operate differently on meaning and representation.
On this episode of #BoundByOath we ask what is property? No, really, what actually ππ it? Where does it come from? Is it βtheftβ? And what do John Locke, Henry George, condos & spears have to do w/ it? We explore this w/
@bartwilson.bsky.social & @mattzwolinski.bsky.social!
ij.org/podcasts/bou...