What do you think?
Rate this book
Die Ökonomie von Gut und Böse
Die meisten unterschätzen, wie tief die Ökonomie in der Kultur verwurzelt ist. Nicht so Tomas Sedlacek. Er behauptet: "In der Ökonomie geht es um Gut und Böse. Es geht um Menschen, die Menschen Geschichten über andere Menschen erzählen. Selbst das ausgefeilteste mathematische Modell ist eine Parabel, eine Geschichte, mit der wir die Welt um uns herum zu begreifen versuchen." Sedlacek erschüttert unseren Begriff von Wirtschaft wie wenige vor ihm. Sein Buch ist ein faszinierender Gang durch die Welt der Ökonomie - vom Gilgamesch-Epos über das Alte Testament und Adam Smith bis zur Wall Street und zur Wirtschaftskrise. Und ganz nebenbei erfahren wir, warum die Sprache der Wirtschaft, die Mathematik, nicht wertfrei und kühl ist, sondern schön und sogar verführerisch …
448 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 2009
332 people are currently reading
2743 people want to read
About the author
Tomáš Sedláček
20 books87 followersTomáš Sedláček is a Czech economist and university lecturer. He is the Chief Macroeconomic Strategist at ČSOB (a Czech national bank), a member of a group Narrative of Europe commissioned by Manuel Barroso and Council Member of World Economic Forum focused on New Economic Thinking. He is a former member of the National Economic Council of the Czech Republic and an economic advisor to former President Václav Havel. His book Economics of Good and Evil, a bestseller in the Czech Republic, was translated into English and published by the Oxford University Press in June, 2011.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 177 reviews
October 4, 2019
ENGLISH
A painstakingly researched new approach to assessing and shaping economic policy with visionary ideas and an extreme end.
It should be noted in advance that, in contrast to some popular science books that are designed with a focus on easier accessibility, the book has some dry text passages. Including what stands between the histories and religious narratives, namely the interpretations and explanations.
The first two-thirds of the book are primarily modeled after the citation of a historical, philosophical, or religious source that taps, interprets, explains, and sometimes examines its economic relevance and conclusiveness for its potential significance and applicability in the contemporary world. Whereby ideas such as complete debt relief, the one-time harvesting of crops to enable poor and disadvantaged people to get food, regular and rigorous debt cuts, control of the financial system and the general call for more ethics in economic terms are the positive aspects of the historiography and various religious writings.
Sometimes the interpretation of economically important matters is a bit far-fetched. It is a good idea to search for sections that have the purpose of conveying sustainable and fair business in holy books like the Bible, Qur'an, Torah and related writings. Occasionally, an old knowledge that has been forgotten and thus, not lost in the blink of an eye, can bring about a tremendous renaissance.
It amazes and amuses, as the author tries, with interesting interpretive tactics in, among other things, to occasionally discover macroeconomic clues in millennia-old Egyptian writings. The explanatory passages about different distinctions, developments and concepts of economic life can be liked and read accurately, but one does not have to. Especially because it is subtly tricky to grasp the context without rudimentary basic knowledge in the respective discipline, without investing one or two extra moments in time for the second read-through devoted to consolidating the content.
The closer the book comes to the present and the end of the story the more exciting the narrative flows some eye-openers wait for the reader and incorporate more of the author's ideas. He deserves respect for criticizing an economy whose flagbearer he is in all areas of activity. The grandeur of self-criticism and self-reflection is something seldom found in economics.
What will grow out of the "homo oeconomicus" will to be seen in the future, but it is meaningful that a competent thinker like Sedláček tends to a slightly adverse future prognosis. The lack of a solution cannot be simply criticized. If the author would know what to do, he would probably be the only one or part of a handful of chosen people worldwide who could dare to openly speak about it. Moreover, it would be dangerously unselfish of him to speak openly of this holy grail of money circulation, without involving self-interest as a substantially constant. After all, it is still about economic proportionality.
A wiki walk can be as refreshing to the mind as a walk through nature in this, yuck, ugh, boo, completely overrated real-life outside books:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-sc...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-ca...
GERMAN
Ein penibel recherchierter Neuansatz zur Beurteilung und Gestaltung der Wirtschaftspolitik mit visionären Ideen und sehr starkem Ende.
Vorab sei angemerkt, dass im Gegensatz zu manch eher populärwissenschaftlich und damit auf leichtere Zugänglichkeit ausgelegtem Werk, der Autor über einige trockene Textpassagen nicht hinwegtäuschen kann. Was zwischen den Geschichts- und Religionserzählungen steht, nämlich die famosen Interpretationen, Erklärungen und Auslegungen, lohnt die Durststrecken aber allemal.
Die ersten 2 Drittel des Buches sind größtenteils nach dem Schema aufgebaut, dass nach dem Zitieren einer historischen, philosophischen oder religiösen Quelle diese auf ihre ökonomische Relevanz und Schlüssigkeit abgeklopft, gedeutet, erläutert und mitunter auf die potentielle Bedeutsamkeit und Anwendbarkeit in der heutigen Welt untersucht wird. Wobei Ideen wie Schuldenerlass, das einmalige Ernten von Feldern, um armen und benachteiligten Menschen zu ermöglichen, an Nahrung zu kommen, regelmäßige und rigorose Schuldenschnitte, Kontrolle des Geldwesens und der generelle Aufruf zu mehr Ethik im finanziellen Gebaren zu den positiven Aspekten der Geschichtsschreibung beziehungsweise diversen Religionsschriften zählen.
Mitunter ist die Auslegung auf unbedingt wirtschaftliche Belange etwas weit hergeholt. Das ist der guten Grundidee, in Geschichtsbüchern, Bibel, Koran, Thora und artverwandten Schriften nach Abschnitten zu suchen, die den Zweck haben, nachhaltiges und gerechtes Wirtschaften zu vermitteln, aber nicht abträglich. Mitunter kann altes, in Vergessenheit und damit haarscharf nicht verlorengegangenes Wissen in seiner Renaissance Enormes bewirken. Es erstaunt und amüsiert, wie es der Autor versteht mit unterhaltsamen Auslegungstaktiken in, unter anderem, Jahrtausende ealten ägyptischen Schriften mitunter makroökonomische Hinweise zu entdecken.
Die erklärenden Passagen über verschiedene Unterscheidungen, Entwicklungen und Begriffe des Wirtschaftslebens kann man mögen und genau lesen, muss man aber nicht. Vor allem weil es ohne rudimentäre Grundkenntnisse in der jeweiligen Disziplin dann doch dezent knifflig ist den Kontext immer zu erfassen, ohne das eine oder andere Quäntchen Zeit zum zweiten, der Festigung des Inhalts gewidmeten, Durchlesens zu investieren.
Je näher das Buch dem eigenen und dem Ende der Geschichte in Form von Gegenwart kommt, desto mitreißender wird der Erzählfluss, da einige Augenöffner auf den geneigten Leser warten und mehr eigene Ideen des Autors mit einfließen, der bisher primär aus vorgegebenen Quellen schöpfte und im letzten Gang sogar gegen seine eigene Disziplin zu Felde zieht. Es gebührt ihm dafür Respekt, Kritik an einer Wirtschaft, deren Fahnenträger er Kraft all seiner Tätigkeitsfelder selbst ist, zu üben. Was aus dem „homo oeconomicus“ werden wird, bleibt abzuwarten und es stimmt doch nachdenklich, dass ein kompetenter Denker wie Sedláček zu einer eher negativen Zukunftsprognose tendiert.
Das Fehlen eines Lösungsansatzes kann insofern nicht angekreidet werden, als dass der Autor, wäre er im Besitz eines solchen, vermutlich der einzige oder Teil einer Handvoll Auserwählter weltweit wäre, die dessen mental habhaft werden könnten. Und insofern sich selbst gegenüber fahrlässig selbstlos wären, diesen heiligen Gral der Geldzirkulation offen heraus zu posaunen, ohne Eigennutz als wichtige Konstante mit einzubeziehen. Es geht schließlich immer noch um ökonomische Verhältnismäßigkeit.
A painstakingly researched new approach to assessing and shaping economic policy with visionary ideas and an extreme end.
It should be noted in advance that, in contrast to some popular science books that are designed with a focus on easier accessibility, the book has some dry text passages. Including what stands between the histories and religious narratives, namely the interpretations and explanations.
The first two-thirds of the book are primarily modeled after the citation of a historical, philosophical, or religious source that taps, interprets, explains, and sometimes examines its economic relevance and conclusiveness for its potential significance and applicability in the contemporary world. Whereby ideas such as complete debt relief, the one-time harvesting of crops to enable poor and disadvantaged people to get food, regular and rigorous debt cuts, control of the financial system and the general call for more ethics in economic terms are the positive aspects of the historiography and various religious writings.
Sometimes the interpretation of economically important matters is a bit far-fetched. It is a good idea to search for sections that have the purpose of conveying sustainable and fair business in holy books like the Bible, Qur'an, Torah and related writings. Occasionally, an old knowledge that has been forgotten and thus, not lost in the blink of an eye, can bring about a tremendous renaissance.
It amazes and amuses, as the author tries, with interesting interpretive tactics in, among other things, to occasionally discover macroeconomic clues in millennia-old Egyptian writings. The explanatory passages about different distinctions, developments and concepts of economic life can be liked and read accurately, but one does not have to. Especially because it is subtly tricky to grasp the context without rudimentary basic knowledge in the respective discipline, without investing one or two extra moments in time for the second read-through devoted to consolidating the content.
The closer the book comes to the present and the end of the story the more exciting the narrative flows some eye-openers wait for the reader and incorporate more of the author's ideas. He deserves respect for criticizing an economy whose flagbearer he is in all areas of activity. The grandeur of self-criticism and self-reflection is something seldom found in economics.
What will grow out of the "homo oeconomicus" will to be seen in the future, but it is meaningful that a competent thinker like Sedláček tends to a slightly adverse future prognosis. The lack of a solution cannot be simply criticized. If the author would know what to do, he would probably be the only one or part of a handful of chosen people worldwide who could dare to openly speak about it. Moreover, it would be dangerously unselfish of him to speak openly of this holy grail of money circulation, without involving self-interest as a substantially constant. After all, it is still about economic proportionality.
A wiki walk can be as refreshing to the mind as a walk through nature in this, yuck, ugh, boo, completely overrated real-life outside books:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-sc...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-ca...
GERMAN
Ein penibel recherchierter Neuansatz zur Beurteilung und Gestaltung der Wirtschaftspolitik mit visionären Ideen und sehr starkem Ende.
Vorab sei angemerkt, dass im Gegensatz zu manch eher populärwissenschaftlich und damit auf leichtere Zugänglichkeit ausgelegtem Werk, der Autor über einige trockene Textpassagen nicht hinwegtäuschen kann. Was zwischen den Geschichts- und Religionserzählungen steht, nämlich die famosen Interpretationen, Erklärungen und Auslegungen, lohnt die Durststrecken aber allemal.
Die ersten 2 Drittel des Buches sind größtenteils nach dem Schema aufgebaut, dass nach dem Zitieren einer historischen, philosophischen oder religiösen Quelle diese auf ihre ökonomische Relevanz und Schlüssigkeit abgeklopft, gedeutet, erläutert und mitunter auf die potentielle Bedeutsamkeit und Anwendbarkeit in der heutigen Welt untersucht wird. Wobei Ideen wie Schuldenerlass, das einmalige Ernten von Feldern, um armen und benachteiligten Menschen zu ermöglichen, an Nahrung zu kommen, regelmäßige und rigorose Schuldenschnitte, Kontrolle des Geldwesens und der generelle Aufruf zu mehr Ethik im finanziellen Gebaren zu den positiven Aspekten der Geschichtsschreibung beziehungsweise diversen Religionsschriften zählen.
Mitunter ist die Auslegung auf unbedingt wirtschaftliche Belange etwas weit hergeholt. Das ist der guten Grundidee, in Geschichtsbüchern, Bibel, Koran, Thora und artverwandten Schriften nach Abschnitten zu suchen, die den Zweck haben, nachhaltiges und gerechtes Wirtschaften zu vermitteln, aber nicht abträglich. Mitunter kann altes, in Vergessenheit und damit haarscharf nicht verlorengegangenes Wissen in seiner Renaissance Enormes bewirken. Es erstaunt und amüsiert, wie es der Autor versteht mit unterhaltsamen Auslegungstaktiken in, unter anderem, Jahrtausende ealten ägyptischen Schriften mitunter makroökonomische Hinweise zu entdecken.
Die erklärenden Passagen über verschiedene Unterscheidungen, Entwicklungen und Begriffe des Wirtschaftslebens kann man mögen und genau lesen, muss man aber nicht. Vor allem weil es ohne rudimentäre Grundkenntnisse in der jeweiligen Disziplin dann doch dezent knifflig ist den Kontext immer zu erfassen, ohne das eine oder andere Quäntchen Zeit zum zweiten, der Festigung des Inhalts gewidmeten, Durchlesens zu investieren.
Je näher das Buch dem eigenen und dem Ende der Geschichte in Form von Gegenwart kommt, desto mitreißender wird der Erzählfluss, da einige Augenöffner auf den geneigten Leser warten und mehr eigene Ideen des Autors mit einfließen, der bisher primär aus vorgegebenen Quellen schöpfte und im letzten Gang sogar gegen seine eigene Disziplin zu Felde zieht. Es gebührt ihm dafür Respekt, Kritik an einer Wirtschaft, deren Fahnenträger er Kraft all seiner Tätigkeitsfelder selbst ist, zu üben. Was aus dem „homo oeconomicus“ werden wird, bleibt abzuwarten und es stimmt doch nachdenklich, dass ein kompetenter Denker wie Sedláček zu einer eher negativen Zukunftsprognose tendiert.
Das Fehlen eines Lösungsansatzes kann insofern nicht angekreidet werden, als dass der Autor, wäre er im Besitz eines solchen, vermutlich der einzige oder Teil einer Handvoll Auserwählter weltweit wäre, die dessen mental habhaft werden könnten. Und insofern sich selbst gegenüber fahrlässig selbstlos wären, diesen heiligen Gral der Geldzirkulation offen heraus zu posaunen, ohne Eigennutz als wichtige Konstante mit einzubeziehen. Es geht schließlich immer noch um ökonomische Verhältnismäßigkeit.
October 7, 2012
Though I didn't agree with all of his conclusions, Sedlacek's book left me with many things to consider. I do think he's correct in his main argument, that the study of economics has become too focused on econometrics to its detriment. A return to a more philosophical, ethical approach might be of use. And I also found his comments on consumer culture to be profound. Can we reach a 'bliss point' by buying things or raising our income? Or can myths and other old views of economics have something to tell us in this day and age.
I have to say, I'm inclined to like any author who can mash up Gilgamesh and Enkidu, The Matrix, Lord of the Rings, Fight Club, the Bible, Adam Smith, and a host of other sources. Especially if that author is willing to admit that the spiritual life might hold some answers for today's world.
I have to say, I'm inclined to like any author who can mash up Gilgamesh and Enkidu, The Matrix, Lord of the Rings, Fight Club, the Bible, Adam Smith, and a host of other sources. Especially if that author is willing to admit that the spiritual life might hold some answers for today's world.
August 15, 2021
کتاب توماش زِدلاچک میخواهد اقتصاد را به معنای ماقبلمتأخرش قرائت کند و از منظری اخلاقی، تاریخ مفاهیم اقتصادی را از اسطورهها، ادیان و خاستگاه فلسفه، یعنی یونان باستان، تا روزگار فعلی ردیابی کند. مثلا: آیا منفعت «خیر» است؟ آیا سعادت در گروی دارایی بیشتر است؟ آیا اقتصاددانها از واقعیت سخن میگویند و آیا زبان ریاضیات ابزاری مناسب برای بازنمایی واقعیت است؟ اینها پرسشهایی هستند که در این کتاب مورد بررسی قرار میگیرند. ضمنا ترجمه خوب و متن ویراسته به نظر میرسد
April 27, 2011
Short review: This is one of the best economic books I have read. It is a wide ranging book about the purpose and history of economics. The first half is about how economics have been understood by looking at ancient historical documents (Epic of Gilgamesh, Old Testament, New Testament, various Greek philosophers). Then it moves to how early economics viewed economics. The last section is about the limits of economics and a call for economics to move away from mathematics determinism and to a renewed interest in ethics. It is not rejecting the mathematical focus of economics but rather calling for a new humility because humans are not rational robots and economists are not very good prophets.
My full review is at http://bookwi.se/economics-good-evil-...
______
I was provided a copy for review from the Amazon Vine program.
My full review is at http://bookwi.se/economics-good-evil-...
______
I was provided a copy for review from the Amazon Vine program.
January 25, 2013
If you want a short textbook on philosophy, this is for you. Don’t expect much economics though.
One of very few things I’ve learnt from this book is that the author is well-read. Unfortunately that doesn’t make it readable. The quotations that amaze you at first begin to feel annoying as you progress and make you think ok, we have heard this a thousand times, do you have an idea of your own? He has indeed, in the end, but nothing more than sheer common sense. Spoiler: overconsumption is bad.
In a word, I felt betrayed.
One of very few things I’ve learnt from this book is that the author is well-read. Unfortunately that doesn’t make it readable. The quotations that amaze you at first begin to feel annoying as you progress and make you think ok, we have heard this a thousand times, do you have an idea of your own? He has indeed, in the end, but nothing more than sheer common sense. Spoiler: overconsumption is bad.
In a word, I felt betrayed.
March 12, 2014
1) Economy is not a real (exact) science.
2) Money is not everything.
Wow, big deal.
Save yourself time and money and read Black Swan by Nassim Nicholas Taleb.
2) Money is not everything.
Wow, big deal.
Save yourself time and money and read Black Swan by Nassim Nicholas Taleb.
October 15, 2011
Definitely an erudite book on many levels... but sort of boring in other ways. It would be perfect as a series of talks belonging to some "humanities festival" for a liberal arts college, or an undergraduate course that is aimed at giving students a chance to do close reading of major western texts focused on a single theme (economics).
Which is another way of saying that I think plenty of people will enjoy this book, but it wasn't really what I was hoping for; I ended up mostly skimming it. I do think, though, that histories of economic thought in this vein are important, especially in their ability to denaturalize the current economic discourse. And Sedlacek's particular point that mathematics is a language that has allowed us insight into some aspects of economics, but is not the only language in which economics has or can be conducted, and in fact causes us to ignore many of those aspects of economic thought that were deemed important for thousands of years, is interesting and worth engaging.
Which is another way of saying that I think plenty of people will enjoy this book, but it wasn't really what I was hoping for; I ended up mostly skimming it. I do think, though, that histories of economic thought in this vein are important, especially in their ability to denaturalize the current economic discourse. And Sedlacek's particular point that mathematics is a language that has allowed us insight into some aspects of economics, but is not the only language in which economics has or can be conducted, and in fact causes us to ignore many of those aspects of economic thought that were deemed important for thousands of years, is interesting and worth engaging.
December 14, 2017
تاريخ رشته اي خاص، مطالعه گسترده ترين دامنه ممكن فهرست مطالبي است كه در آن رشته عرضه مي كند.
اين كتاب سعي مي كنه به سوال جواب بده كه معني اقتصاد چيست؟ چگونه مي توانين آن را عملا به كار ببريم؟ و چگونه مي توان آن را به ديگر رشته ها به روشي قابل فهم پيوند داد؟
كتاب خوانشي با پستي و بلندي فراوان دارد و گاهي به شدت انتزاعي مي شود. هرچند خود نويسنده در پانويس كتاب توضيحات بسيار مبسوطي از مسائل داده با اين حال با توجه به اطلاعات كم در مورد كتابهايي مثل عهد عتيق و عهد جديد يا درباره مسحيت و آدام اسميت خيلي سخت ميشه متن كتاب رو فهميد و خط اصلي نوشته رو حفظ كرد. نويسنده كلا اين فرض رو داره كه خوانندها اين آگاهي هاي اوليه رو دارن و فكر كنم يجا اول كتاب در مورد مخاطباش كه دانشجوهاي اقتصاد باشن يه چيزايي نوشته!
نويسنده ارجاعات زيادي به فيلم ماتريكس داده و كنجكاوم كرد كه دوباره برم اين فيلم ببينم و اينسري ديگه فقط از صحنه هاي اكشنش لذت نب��م 😊.
كلا نويسنده ميخواد بگه كه اين اقتصادي كه شما ازش فقط نمودار و فرمول ديدين، اون اقتصادي نيست كه در اصل بايد وجود داشته باشه. اقتصاد زير مجموعه اي از اخلاق حساب ميشه و با حفظ دستاوردهايي كه تو صد و بيست سال گذشته بهش اضافه شده بايد به حوزه علوم اجتماعي برگرده.
ارتباطش با خير و شر رو هم نفهميدم🤔.
اين كتاب سعي مي كنه به سوال جواب بده كه معني اقتصاد چيست؟ چگونه مي توانين آن را عملا به كار ببريم؟ و چگونه مي توان آن را به ديگر رشته ها به روشي قابل فهم پيوند داد؟
كتاب خوانشي با پستي و بلندي فراوان دارد و گاهي به شدت انتزاعي مي شود. هرچند خود نويسنده در پانويس كتاب توضيحات بسيار مبسوطي از مسائل داده با اين حال با توجه به اطلاعات كم در مورد كتابهايي مثل عهد عتيق و عهد جديد يا درباره مسحيت و آدام اسميت خيلي سخت ميشه متن كتاب رو فهميد و خط اصلي نوشته رو حفظ كرد. نويسنده كلا اين فرض رو داره كه خوانندها اين آگاهي هاي اوليه رو دارن و فكر كنم يجا اول كتاب در مورد مخاطباش كه دانشجوهاي اقتصاد باشن يه چيزايي نوشته!
نويسنده ارجاعات زيادي به فيلم ماتريكس داده و كنجكاوم كرد كه دوباره برم اين فيلم ببينم و اينسري ديگه فقط از صحنه هاي اكشنش لذت نب��م 😊.
كلا نويسنده ميخواد بگه كه اين اقتصادي كه شما ازش فقط نمودار و فرمول ديدين، اون اقتصادي نيست كه در اصل بايد وجود داشته باشه. اقتصاد زير مجموعه اي از اخلاق حساب ميشه و با حفظ دستاوردهايي كه تو صد و بيست سال گذشته بهش اضافه شده بايد به حوزه علوم اجتماعي برگرده.
ارتباطش با خير و شر رو هم نفهميدم🤔.
December 26, 2024
Ekonomika yra moralė. Visą istoriją tai buvo pasirinkimas tarp gero ir blogo. Kaip religija ir moralinės normos kūrė mūsų supratimą apie ekonomiką. Ir atvirkščiai. Politikos ir ekonomikos gurmanams.
March 30, 2014
I heard Sedlacek had problems to submit his PhD thesis which he then published (reworked) in a book form.
I initially thought this is just another example how wretched current economics is, but in fact I tend to agree now - at best this belongs to the literature department.
The book is roughly split into 2 parts. The first part is a tour of western literary cannon (well small part of it - Gilgamesh, Bible, bit of jewish tradition, scholastics...) ending with Adam Smith. Sedlacek provides literary-theoretic interpretations of these works through the lens of economics. The problem of this part is that it so overstuffed with quotes from primary and secondary sources that it is hard to find original sentences in it. In fact it is likely that this part doesn't offer any original contribution whatsoever. Apart from that it is a decent, if a bit boring overview of economical thinking in the roots of judeo-christian culture.
The second part (after a few foreshadows in the first part) then launches into straight up critique of economics, particularly its mathematization and the homo economicus model. While there is indeed a lot to criticize here I have to say only thing worse than most of contemporary economics are shallow critics of it...
Sedlacek reveals very shallow understanding of many concepts (utilitarian ethics, game theory, Goedel incompletness all get butchered) often fights strawmen or in trying to be provocative and smart comes off rather as annoying and thick. His pointing out the foundational problem in the definition of utility is pure "emperor-has-no-clothes"-smart-assery one has to just roll his eyes (while being called an apologist for the economics establishment). As a book ultimately about epistemology it has too little Popper for example and too much Matrix quotes...
His critique never raises above triteness like: "If we are to call truly scientific only things translatable into mathematics, things like emotions and the soul (and love) fall into something of a lower ontological category." Not only is his critique weakly informed, the "solutions" he offers sound also trite, impractical and full of armchair philosopher self-righteousness.
Oh well... nothing to see here, move along. Little knowledge is more dangerous then no knowledge, but the only damage this could do is fueling pseudo-intellectual cocktail discussions - for which it is probably too long and too boring.
I feel bad about being this negative... also I really regret finishing this book.. a clear sunk cost problem I have...
I initially thought this is just another example how wretched current economics is, but in fact I tend to agree now - at best this belongs to the literature department.
The book is roughly split into 2 parts. The first part is a tour of western literary cannon (well small part of it - Gilgamesh, Bible, bit of jewish tradition, scholastics...) ending with Adam Smith. Sedlacek provides literary-theoretic interpretations of these works through the lens of economics. The problem of this part is that it so overstuffed with quotes from primary and secondary sources that it is hard to find original sentences in it. In fact it is likely that this part doesn't offer any original contribution whatsoever. Apart from that it is a decent, if a bit boring overview of economical thinking in the roots of judeo-christian culture.
The second part (after a few foreshadows in the first part) then launches into straight up critique of economics, particularly its mathematization and the homo economicus model. While there is indeed a lot to criticize here I have to say only thing worse than most of contemporary economics are shallow critics of it...
Sedlacek reveals very shallow understanding of many concepts (utilitarian ethics, game theory, Goedel incompletness all get butchered) often fights strawmen or in trying to be provocative and smart comes off rather as annoying and thick. His pointing out the foundational problem in the definition of utility is pure "emperor-has-no-clothes"-smart-assery one has to just roll his eyes (while being called an apologist for the economics establishment). As a book ultimately about epistemology it has too little Popper for example and too much Matrix quotes...
His critique never raises above triteness like: "If we are to call truly scientific only things translatable into mathematics, things like emotions and the soul (and love) fall into something of a lower ontological category." Not only is his critique weakly informed, the "solutions" he offers sound also trite, impractical and full of armchair philosopher self-righteousness.
Oh well... nothing to see here, move along. Little knowledge is more dangerous then no knowledge, but the only damage this could do is fueling pseudo-intellectual cocktail discussions - for which it is probably too long and too boring.
I feel bad about being this negative... also I really regret finishing this book.. a clear sunk cost problem I have...
April 1, 2012
Although the title contains the word economics, the book is more a concentrated history of philosophy, human culture, and civilisation. As the reader learns at the end of this book, Sedlacek's treatise is meant as a plea for refocusing on normative economics than the mathematics dominated positive economics of today.
Despite that the text often lacks drawing conclusions and does not explain how the risen questions and topics apply to economics.
Readers should have basic knowledge in macro economics, philosophy, and religion to have a better access to this book. Thus it will be very challenging to think about the question why an omniscient God had not known that Adam and Eve would eat the apple from the Tree of Knowledge and compare this event to Prometheus bringing the fire to men.
Furthermore one can think about today's ideas of going back to nature and living on subsistence means in the understanding of the Gilgamesh epos becoming uncivilised and animalistic, a retrogression to the natural state.
Sedlacek even adapts pop culture and shows a preference for the Matrix Trilogy. But why does he not refer to Gordon Gekko's quotation "Greed is good." in the film "Wall Street I"? It would be a great visualisation of the chapter on Bernard Mandeville.
Despite that the text often lacks drawing conclusions and does not explain how the risen questions and topics apply to economics.
Readers should have basic knowledge in macro economics, philosophy, and religion to have a better access to this book. Thus it will be very challenging to think about the question why an omniscient God had not known that Adam and Eve would eat the apple from the Tree of Knowledge and compare this event to Prometheus bringing the fire to men.
Furthermore one can think about today's ideas of going back to nature and living on subsistence means in the understanding of the Gilgamesh epos becoming uncivilised and animalistic, a retrogression to the natural state.
Sedlacek even adapts pop culture and shows a preference for the Matrix Trilogy. But why does he not refer to Gordon Gekko's quotation "Greed is good." in the film "Wall Street I"? It would be a great visualisation of the chapter on Bernard Mandeville.
October 27, 2025
Nie jest to typowy podręcznik ekonomiczny zarówno pod względem treści jak i formuły. Raczej nie poznamy w niej mechanizmów funkcjonowania rynku czy czegoś takiego. Natomiast książka przywraca i autor też o to apeluje, żeby przywrócić aspekt filozofii i etyki do ekonomii. Jest to bardzo ciekawe, a do tego przyglądanie się tym aspektom na przestrzeni mileniów rozwoju cywilizacji jest całkiem ekscytujące. Na pewno mógłbym wynieść z tej książki więcej, ale i tak bawiłem się dobrze i dała mi ona sporo satysfakcji
September 17, 2013
Musím říct, že jediný důvod, proč jsem knihu četla, byla přednáška na TV Noe :) Zní to zvláštně, ale jednou jsem při přepínání televize narazila na kanálu Noe na jakousi přednášku, byla tam spousta starších lidí a přednášel jim velice zvláštní výřečný pán, který vesele, výrazně a taky svérázně gestikuloval. Neviděla jsem to od začátku, takže jsem se jen chytala náznaků a došlo mi, že se jedná o snahu poukázat na ekonomii v Bibli. Tenhle pořad mě naprosto dostal, protože jsem se poprvé v životě setkala s člověkem, který mi byl schopen vysvětlit ekonomii tak, aby to dávalo smysl. A to za pomocí Bible. Ta přednáška měla působit naopak, ale já si z toho vzala to, co jsem chtěla a byla jsem unesena.
Vzhledem k tomu, že jsem vystudovala literaturu a ne ekonomii, tahle kniha mě bavila a to nesmírně. Ty rozbory byly takovou hezkou cestou zpátky do vzpomínek a připadalo mi to, jako bych spíš četla nějakou diplomku některého ze spolužáků (ale o mnohem chytřejšího :D). Ani nevím, jestli tahle kniha náhodou není rozpracovanou verzí diplomové nebo jiné práce, protože rozhodně má žádoucí atributy. No a abych mluvila k věci, jako studentce literatury nebo humanitních věd vcelku, prostě mi to dávalo smysl a bylo to psáno na stejné vlnové délce, jako funguje moje myšlení. Diskutovala jsem o knížce se známými, nutno dodat, že jsou vystudovaní ekonomové.. a je kniha nezaujala :D Dokonce jsem se setkala s názory a popularizaci a zjednodušování vědy, tak já to ale nevnímám. Jenže to je ten problém, o ekonomii vím velké houby. Já to prostě beru tak, že jsem se konečně mohla dozvědět něco o vědě, která mému srdci prostě není blízká a přesto bych jí strašně ráda pochopila, abych si nepřipadala jako největší idiot při různých diskusích... Byla to zábavná forma, jak se podívat na ekonomii z jiného pohledu a já to oceňuji :) (protože jsem dodnes nenašla žádnou českou verzi "Economy for dummies" -> tu bych si přečetla). Pro mě je Tomáš Sedláček sympaťák, který mi prostě dokáže jako laikovi vysvětlit něco, co prostě normálně nechápu. Plus je očividně vzdělaný ve více oborech, jelikož hledá výborné citace z klasické literatury.
Všeobecně jsem fanouškem hledání jakýchkoli metafor, odkazů a podobně v Bibli, takže to byla moje nejoblíbenější kapitola :) Zároveň jsem teď zjistila, že ona přednáška, kterou jsem kdysi viděla, měla stejný název jako tato kniha. Takže jsem s tím už byla tak nějak seznámena dopředu.
Abych teda ukončila tuhle naprosto zvláštní a pravděpodobně zbytečnou recenzi, knihu rozhodně doporučuji těm, co tíhnou spíš k literatuře než ekonomii a chtějí se pobavit a zároveň dozvědět něco nového. Myslím si, že pan Sedláček umí bavit moc dobře. A to, jestli moc popularizuje, vůbec nejsem schopná posoudit :D
PS: Četla jsem normální knihu po necelém roce, byl to zvláštní pocit :D Ale naštěstí jsem nechtěla klikat na stránky a čekat, až se změní obsah :D
Vzhledem k tomu, že jsem vystudovala literaturu a ne ekonomii, tahle kniha mě bavila a to nesmírně. Ty rozbory byly takovou hezkou cestou zpátky do vzpomínek a připadalo mi to, jako bych spíš četla nějakou diplomku některého ze spolužáků (ale o mnohem chytřejšího :D). Ani nevím, jestli tahle kniha náhodou není rozpracovanou verzí diplomové nebo jiné práce, protože rozhodně má žádoucí atributy. No a abych mluvila k věci, jako studentce literatury nebo humanitních věd vcelku, prostě mi to dávalo smysl a bylo to psáno na stejné vlnové délce, jako funguje moje myšlení. Diskutovala jsem o knížce se známými, nutno dodat, že jsou vystudovaní ekonomové.. a je kniha nezaujala :D Dokonce jsem se setkala s názory a popularizaci a zjednodušování vědy, tak já to ale nevnímám. Jenže to je ten problém, o ekonomii vím velké houby. Já to prostě beru tak, že jsem se konečně mohla dozvědět něco o vědě, která mému srdci prostě není blízká a přesto bych jí strašně ráda pochopila, abych si nepřipadala jako největší idiot při různých diskusích... Byla to zábavná forma, jak se podívat na ekonomii z jiného pohledu a já to oceňuji :) (protože jsem dodnes nenašla žádnou českou verzi "Economy for dummies" -> tu bych si přečetla). Pro mě je Tomáš Sedláček sympaťák, který mi prostě dokáže jako laikovi vysvětlit něco, co prostě normálně nechápu. Plus je očividně vzdělaný ve více oborech, jelikož hledá výborné citace z klasické literatury.
Všeobecně jsem fanouškem hledání jakýchkoli metafor, odkazů a podobně v Bibli, takže to byla moje nejoblíbenější kapitola :) Zároveň jsem teď zjistila, že ona přednáška, kterou jsem kdysi viděla, měla stejný název jako tato kniha. Takže jsem s tím už byla tak nějak seznámena dopředu.
Abych teda ukončila tuhle naprosto zvláštní a pravděpodobně zbytečnou recenzi, knihu rozhodně doporučuji těm, co tíhnou spíš k literatuře než ekonomii a chtějí se pobavit a zároveň dozvědět něco nového. Myslím si, že pan Sedláček umí bavit moc dobře. A to, jestli moc popularizuje, vůbec nejsem schopná posoudit :D
PS: Četla jsem normální knihu po necelém roce, byl to zvláštní pocit :D Ale naštěstí jsem nechtěla klikat na stránky a čekat, až se změní obsah :D
July 17, 2020
این کتاب را میتوان نقد پست مدرن علم اقتصاد ماشین وار و امپریالیستی پنداشت .⠀
این کتاب به ما می گویید که مکاتب اقتصادی را بر اساس جهانبینی و ایدولوژی خود بکار نبریم بلکه براساس کدام مکتب به درد مسایل پیش رو میخورد استفاده کنیم .⠀
کنار آموزش اقتصادی و علمی همزمان از الهام و کشف رازها غافل نشویم .
این کتاب به ما می گویید که مکاتب اقتصادی را بر اساس جهانبینی و ایدولوژی خود بکار نبریم بلکه براساس کدام مکتب به درد مسایل پیش رو میخورد استفاده کنیم .⠀
کنار آموزش اقتصادی و علمی همزمان از الهام و کشف رازها غافل نشویم .
June 12, 2020
It isn't a book which gives practical skills - it rather broadens the perspective on things which belong to the science of economy. Some economic patterns appeared in the literature (Bible, Epic of Gilgamesh) thousands of years ago - long before the economy was treated as a science discipline. Economic patterns and human behavior are mixed up very often so finding those patterns isn't difficult - economic rules may be applied in many places.
You can also treat this book as a summary of the economic thoughts - Smith, Hume, Keynes and many other are cited there.
"why we pursue economic growth?". I listened to it in May and June 2020 so parts about irrational economic growth and crisis were super interesting. Many golden thoughts which you here now were said a couple of years ago (and thousand of years ago as well - I bet).
I picked an audio version and that was the mistake - reading probably would help me gain more.
You can also treat this book as a summary of the economic thoughts - Smith, Hume, Keynes and many other are cited there.
"why we pursue economic growth?". I listened to it in May and June 2020 so parts about irrational economic growth and crisis were super interesting. Many golden thoughts which you here now were said a couple of years ago (and thousand of years ago as well - I bet).
I picked an audio version and that was the mistake - reading probably would help me gain more.
September 25, 2017
The guy drives me crazy trying to persuade that gender equality is much higher at distant districts of that (quite patriarchal) country, than in capital. The best argument he uses “econometrics shows this, and you know, math doesn’t lie”. When we run down devils in details, it turned out that the guy used share if girls among higher education students as a metrics of gender equality. In distant districts higher education facilities are limited to medical and pedagogical ones, overpopulated by girls. Contrary, in the capital there is much broader set of education institutions, including technical ones preferred by boys, and share of girls is naturally lower. Wrong implicit assumptions lead to wrong results, despite of all that ubersophisticated math.
Tomáš Sedláček tells that story, but on a bigger scale. Currently, we hide implicit assumptions behind sophisticated formulas of economics (which more and more is limited to econometrics). Math replaced ethics in economic debates, based on assumption that math is value-neutral. However, this is very recent development. Over centuries economic though was inseparable from ethics, moral philosophy. In this book author walk through the long history, analyzing sources as old as Gilgamesh and the Old Testament, coming to the Greek philosophers, continuing to Christian economics, and then to Enlightenment ages, and finally the Wall Street. The book is well written and easy to read. While I don’t agree with several arguments, it is thought provoking and very useful.
To my surprise, there is not much Wall Street in the book, while Crash 2008 could be a very good case study. Intricate econometrics and math models simply hide the basic assumption that property prices will rise forever. As soon as this assumption turned out be false, and prices stagnated and slightly went down, all models went crazy and market crashed. On the other hand, author pay some attention to Debt, which is a great issue going well beyond Public Debt.
Overall—nicely written, thought provoking, well referenced book.
Tomáš Sedláček tells that story, but on a bigger scale. Currently, we hide implicit assumptions behind sophisticated formulas of economics (which more and more is limited to econometrics). Math replaced ethics in economic debates, based on assumption that math is value-neutral. However, this is very recent development. Over centuries economic though was inseparable from ethics, moral philosophy. In this book author walk through the long history, analyzing sources as old as Gilgamesh and the Old Testament, coming to the Greek philosophers, continuing to Christian economics, and then to Enlightenment ages, and finally the Wall Street. The book is well written and easy to read. While I don’t agree with several arguments, it is thought provoking and very useful.
To my surprise, there is not much Wall Street in the book, while Crash 2008 could be a very good case study. Intricate econometrics and math models simply hide the basic assumption that property prices will rise forever. As soon as this assumption turned out be false, and prices stagnated and slightly went down, all models went crazy and market crashed. On the other hand, author pay some attention to Debt, which is a great issue going well beyond Public Debt.
Overall—nicely written, thought provoking, well referenced book.
February 27, 2020
This is a difficult book to classify, and thus to review. It's not a book of economics, but rather about economics, particularly the modern focus on mathematics to the exclusion of ethics. It's pretty abstract and philosophical. I almost gave up a number of times in the first 150 pages, as I slogged through Sedlacek picking out and commenting on the economic bread crumbs found in the most ancient of literature, the Epic of Gilgamesh, followed by Greek thought, Stoicism, historic Christianity, and the Enlightenment thought of Hume, Descartes, and Adam Smith.
One of most interesting chapters was on Adam Smith: for example, the views he is famous for advocating (the "invisible hand," among other things) are not actually his own, and his economic ethics are more complex than commonly understood. The other fascinating section was his short discussion on how the contemporary Keynesian approach to the business cycle is anything by Keynesian--what he dubs "Bastardized Keynesianism"--i.e. that deficits are okay in time of decline as long as they are paid back out of surpluses. Obviously, that second half of the equation has been totally ignored by modern national economies, as we in the West continue to spend ourselves into oblivion.
Sedlacek calls out modern economists for their arrogance in attempting to explain virtually everything using exclusively mathematical economic models, arguing that they have become just as dogmatic and unscientific as many religious people (supposedly) are. He calls for more ethics and more epistemological humility in his field, and what a welcome call it is. This book is a slow burn, and not too terribly exciting, but ultimately intellectually stimulating and satisfying.
One of most interesting chapters was on Adam Smith: for example, the views he is famous for advocating (the "invisible hand," among other things) are not actually his own, and his economic ethics are more complex than commonly understood. The other fascinating section was his short discussion on how the contemporary Keynesian approach to the business cycle is anything by Keynesian--what he dubs "Bastardized Keynesianism"--i.e. that deficits are okay in time of decline as long as they are paid back out of surpluses. Obviously, that second half of the equation has been totally ignored by modern national economies, as we in the West continue to spend ourselves into oblivion.
Sedlacek calls out modern economists for their arrogance in attempting to explain virtually everything using exclusively mathematical economic models, arguing that they have become just as dogmatic and unscientific as many religious people (supposedly) are. He calls for more ethics and more epistemological humility in his field, and what a welcome call it is. This book is a slow burn, and not too terribly exciting, but ultimately intellectually stimulating and satisfying.
May 21, 2013
A very intellectual and informative Book, but his style of writing is pleasant . Sedlacek manages to explain difficult topics in comprehensive manner, so that everyone could understand it even, if one doesn't know much about economy. I particularly liked the fact that he criticized the domination of mathematics in the economy and regret the lack and disregard of other subjects like philosophy, history, ethnology, etc.
He suggest to change some of our habits (egoism, to achieve fame and profit, to rethink our understanding of economy so that we can be open for some alternatives to our consumer society and its harmful sides.
I learned many things by reading this book. Especially philosophical and historical facts about the relationship of Christianity with economy and the viewpoint of some personalities.
I strongly recommend this book, u will like it, believe me :)
Peter
He suggest to change some of our habits (egoism, to achieve fame and profit, to rethink our understanding of economy so that we can be open for some alternatives to our consumer society and its harmful sides.
I learned many things by reading this book. Especially philosophical and historical facts about the relationship of Christianity with economy and the viewpoint of some personalities.
I strongly recommend this book, u will like it, believe me :)
Peter
March 14, 2019
Es un libro difícil de catalogar como historia económica o siquiera como historia del pensamiento económico. Es, a mi parecer, un estudio del alma de la economía, que es la ética. Sin exageraciones bobas, el autor hace una fuerte y muy sensata crítica a la corriente prevaleciente en la disciplina económica (en especial al mecanicismo de la teoría económica), a la vez que rompe el estereotipo positivista de la historia del pensamiento económico. Textos como éste deberían ser básicos en cualquier programa de economía, sobre todo en los que se enseña la superioridad de la libertad individual (la cual debería incluir la pluralidad de escuelas de pensamiento económico para que el economista decida entre ellas).
November 21, 2012
I found this book googling "economics of good" so I was primed to enjoy it and was in the mood. It delivered. The author meandered a bit but in the end I was left full and satisfied. Do read it. I found it free online.
August 8, 2013
everyone whit an opinion about the current economic crisis should study this and think again
January 21, 2012
Nečekal jsem mnoho, nedostal jsem mnoho. Z mého pohledu zbytečná kniha.
September 21, 2020
I wasn't expecting much from this book, but it really blew me away, changing the way I understood economics while articulating many of the qualms I had with the field. Sedláček is a leading economist in the Czech Republic who argues for the need to ground economics in the humanities. Sedláček's "meta-economics" examines the narratives, assumptions, and values that underlie the supposedly objective/rational/scientific discipline of mainstream economics. Economics of Good and Evil includes chapters discussing the meta-economics of Gilgamesh, the Hebrew Bible, Christianity, Descartes, and the moral philosopher (yup, that's what he was!) Adam Smith. Sedláček critiques the over-mathematization of economics, which creates sophisticated models with little practical use because they are built on simplifying premises that bear no resemblance to reality. He offers alternate frameworks for an economics drawn from great works of literature, philosophy, and religion. While economists currently try to maximize growth at all times, Sedláček proposes a "sabbath economy" that prioritizes giving people time to appreciate what they've already created rather than constantly working towards more (with no increase in happiness to show for it, as Sedláček notes from the psychology literature).
Sedláček's bold new vision for economic frameworks should be required reading for economics students. It puts the field in perspective in an invaluable way. If more policy-makers thought like Sedláček, we'd live in a happier, more sustainable world.
Sedláček's bold new vision for economic frameworks should be required reading for economics students. It puts the field in perspective in an invaluable way. If more policy-makers thought like Sedláček, we'd live in a happier, more sustainable world.
May 21, 2020
Es un libro muy interesante de principio a fin. La primera parte es conocimiento histórico sumado a una perspectiva económica interesante. La segunda ya va más a la crítica del autor con respecto al capitalismo de crecimiento (mas no al capitalismo en sí).
Me ha gustado muchísimo este libro pues permite ver una mirada que, hoy en día, no es común. El autor enfoca una crítica al cimiento del modelo actual, y como éste se ha alejado de sus raíces.
Se hace una deconstrucción de la economía a través de una reconstrucción histórica, mas no es un libro de respuestas.
Lo recomiendo sin ninguna duda, y sobretodo a los estudiantes de economía o ya profesionales de la misma. Ayudará mucho a ver una imagen panorámica de la ciencia social.
Me ha gustado muchísimo este libro pues permite ver una mirada que, hoy en día, no es común. El autor enfoca una crítica al cimiento del modelo actual, y como éste se ha alejado de sus raíces.
Se hace una deconstrucción de la economía a través de una reconstrucción histórica, mas no es un libro de respuestas.
Lo recomiendo sin ninguna duda, y sobretodo a los estudiantes de economía o ya profesionales de la misma. Ayudará mucho a ver una imagen panorámica de la ciencia social.
August 28, 2015
De ondertitel maakt duidelijk welke reis er gemaakt wordt aan de hand van gids Tomáš Sedláček: De zoektocht naar economische zingeving van Gilgamesj tot Wall Street. Het boek is een aangepaste versie van een proefschrift dat Sedláček indiende bij de Faculteit der Sociale Wetenschappen van de universiteit waar hij toen studeerde. Het werd verworpen vanwege 'twijfelachtige wetenschappelijke waarde'. Of dat een correct oordeel is of niet, kan op basis van het boek niet meer worden nagegaan want het boek richt zicht op een ander publiek. Wij. Ons.
Tijdens een interview in 2009, toen het boek in Tsjechië al een bestseller was, antwoordt Sedláček op de vraag of hij met het boek duidelijk wil maken dat economie niet alleen over cijfers en mathematische modellen gaat:
Ja, de economie is een prachtig gebied. Het gaat vooral over de manier waarop mensen zich gedragen en tot elkaar verhouden. Ik ben op zoek gegaan naar een spiegel, omdat het anders te moeilijk en onuitvoerbaar zou zijn. Daarom gebruik ik de verhalen uit het Oude Testament en uit Mesopotamië als hulpmiddel. Deze mensen maakten ongeveer hetzelfde mee als wat wij meemaken. Wij gebruiken nu voornamelijk de wiskunde en een wetenschappelijke, rigoureuze aanpak om de wereld om ons heen uit te leggen[...]
"Daarom heb ik geen enkel cijfer opgenomen in dit boek. De bladzijden zijn van voor naar achteren genummerd. Dus het begint met -368, alleen maar om duidelijk te maken dat een cijfer iets is dat wordt gemaakt door onze samenleving, een construct, een product dat ons kan dienen en ons zou moeten dienen, maar soms verblindt het ons ook als de enige manier waarop we nog rond kunnen kijken, is door middel van cijfers en de statistieken. Soms zijn cijfers nuttig, soms niet en kan ze zelfs misleidend zijn.
Helaas is de nummering van de bladzijden in de Nederlandse versie (vertaling van de Engelse versie van het boek dat in 2011 uitkwam) niet overgenomen van het origineel. Belangrijker is echter dat het boek niet fantastisch geredigeerd is; het bevat relatief veel kromme zinnen en spelfouten. Dat neem ik niet mee in de beoordeling van het boek, want het gaat mij alleen om de inhoud, om wat Sedláček vertelt en beweert.
In deel 1, De economie in de Oudheid - die bij Sedláček wel wat erg lang doorloopt - besteedt Sedláček aandacht aan achtereenvolgens het Gilgamesj-epos, het Oude Testament, het oude Griekenland, het christendom, Descartes, Bernard Mandeville om te eindigen met Adam Smith, de 'smid van de economie'. Sedláček tracht met deze 'spiegels' aan te tonen dat de economie als wetenschap niet op zich staat en zeker niet, zoals sommige economen graag willen (doen) geloven, waardevrij is, maar nauw verbonden is met filosofie, mythes, religie, antropologie, en kunst. Economie staat niet los van de samenleving, kan niet los gezien worden van cultuur en is (dus) niet en nooit waardevrij. Ook al zou onze huidige minister van financiën, Jeroen Dijsselbloem, dat nog zo graag willen en *gelooft* hij dat zelf wel.
Sedláček tracht in Deel 2, Ketterse ideeën, onder andere aan te tonen dat er geen Homo Economicus bestaat (in april nog onderwerp van een aflevering van Freakonomics radio Should We Really Behave Like Economists Say We Do?) en dat het idee dat alles te reduceren is tot cijfers en modellen niet alleen niet klopt, maar gevaarlijk fout is. Hij illustreert dat door economische modellen te vergelijken met natuurkundige modellen en de wijze waarop deze toegepast worden. Hij kiest niet voor niets natuurkunde, natuurlijk, want als er iets is waar economen naar streven dan is het wel dat economie als net zo hard, zuiver en exact beschouwd wordt als natuurkunde. Door modellen als steigers voor te stellen die helpen bij het bouwen van een prachtige kathedraal, toont Sedláček ondubbelzinnig aan dat de Natuurkundige kathedraal overeind blijft en nog eeuwen gebruikt én bewonderd wordt, terwijl de Economische kathedraal bij het minste geringste in elkaar zakt als een plumpudding.
De economie van goed en kwaad is een fascinerend, tot overpeinzingen aanzettend, interessant boek dat duidelijk maakt, voor zover daar nog twijfels over bestaan, dat mensen, de hemel zij dank!, lang niet allemaal zoals de bijen van Mandeville zijn, dat de 'onzichtbare hand van de markt' niet de vervanger van god is, en dat ethiek en economie niet los van elkaar kunnen en vooral niet mógen worden gezien. Of, zoals hij het zelf verwoordt interview:
I mean the word ‘ethics’ has become a bad word, a rude word. And yet, economics started as an ethical discourse. Adam Smith was a moral philosopher, David Hume, Thomas Malthus and others were chiefly moral philosophers. And this is where economics was born. Today we try to get away from this cradle, from this origin of the discourse, and it can lead to very dangerous situations.
En dus mag niemand uit The Wealth of Nations citeren zonder dat citaat te omringen en te ondersteunen door minimaal twee citaten uit The Theory of Moral Sentiments. Niemand. Vind ik.
Zie ook: Hoe Brian dankzij Annejet de kans kreeg te illustreren wat het verschil is tussen economische modellen en de realiteit
Tijdens een interview in 2009, toen het boek in Tsjechië al een bestseller was, antwoordt Sedláček op de vraag of hij met het boek duidelijk wil maken dat economie niet alleen over cijfers en mathematische modellen gaat:
Ja, de economie is een prachtig gebied. Het gaat vooral over de manier waarop mensen zich gedragen en tot elkaar verhouden. Ik ben op zoek gegaan naar een spiegel, omdat het anders te moeilijk en onuitvoerbaar zou zijn. Daarom gebruik ik de verhalen uit het Oude Testament en uit Mesopotamië als hulpmiddel. Deze mensen maakten ongeveer hetzelfde mee als wat wij meemaken. Wij gebruiken nu voornamelijk de wiskunde en een wetenschappelijke, rigoureuze aanpak om de wereld om ons heen uit te leggen[...]
"Daarom heb ik geen enkel cijfer opgenomen in dit boek. De bladzijden zijn van voor naar achteren genummerd. Dus het begint met -368, alleen maar om duidelijk te maken dat een cijfer iets is dat wordt gemaakt door onze samenleving, een construct, een product dat ons kan dienen en ons zou moeten dienen, maar soms verblindt het ons ook als de enige manier waarop we nog rond kunnen kijken, is door middel van cijfers en de statistieken. Soms zijn cijfers nuttig, soms niet en kan ze zelfs misleidend zijn.
Helaas is de nummering van de bladzijden in de Nederlandse versie (vertaling van de Engelse versie van het boek dat in 2011 uitkwam) niet overgenomen van het origineel. Belangrijker is echter dat het boek niet fantastisch geredigeerd is; het bevat relatief veel kromme zinnen en spelfouten. Dat neem ik niet mee in de beoordeling van het boek, want het gaat mij alleen om de inhoud, om wat Sedláček vertelt en beweert.
In deel 1, De economie in de Oudheid - die bij Sedláček wel wat erg lang doorloopt - besteedt Sedláček aandacht aan achtereenvolgens het Gilgamesj-epos, het Oude Testament, het oude Griekenland, het christendom, Descartes, Bernard Mandeville om te eindigen met Adam Smith, de 'smid van de economie'. Sedláček tracht met deze 'spiegels' aan te tonen dat de economie als wetenschap niet op zich staat en zeker niet, zoals sommige economen graag willen (doen) geloven, waardevrij is, maar nauw verbonden is met filosofie, mythes, religie, antropologie, en kunst. Economie staat niet los van de samenleving, kan niet los gezien worden van cultuur en is (dus) niet en nooit waardevrij. Ook al zou onze huidige minister van financiën, Jeroen Dijsselbloem, dat nog zo graag willen en *gelooft* hij dat zelf wel.
Sedláček tracht in Deel 2, Ketterse ideeën, onder andere aan te tonen dat er geen Homo Economicus bestaat (in april nog onderwerp van een aflevering van Freakonomics radio Should We Really Behave Like Economists Say We Do?) en dat het idee dat alles te reduceren is tot cijfers en modellen niet alleen niet klopt, maar gevaarlijk fout is. Hij illustreert dat door economische modellen te vergelijken met natuurkundige modellen en de wijze waarop deze toegepast worden. Hij kiest niet voor niets natuurkunde, natuurlijk, want als er iets is waar economen naar streven dan is het wel dat economie als net zo hard, zuiver en exact beschouwd wordt als natuurkunde. Door modellen als steigers voor te stellen die helpen bij het bouwen van een prachtige kathedraal, toont Sedláček ondubbelzinnig aan dat de Natuurkundige kathedraal overeind blijft en nog eeuwen gebruikt én bewonderd wordt, terwijl de Economische kathedraal bij het minste geringste in elkaar zakt als een plumpudding.
De economie van goed en kwaad is een fascinerend, tot overpeinzingen aanzettend, interessant boek dat duidelijk maakt, voor zover daar nog twijfels over bestaan, dat mensen, de hemel zij dank!, lang niet allemaal zoals de bijen van Mandeville zijn, dat de 'onzichtbare hand van de markt' niet de vervanger van god is, en dat ethiek en economie niet los van elkaar kunnen en vooral niet mógen worden gezien. Of, zoals hij het zelf verwoordt interview:
I mean the word ‘ethics’ has become a bad word, a rude word. And yet, economics started as an ethical discourse. Adam Smith was a moral philosopher, David Hume, Thomas Malthus and others were chiefly moral philosophers. And this is where economics was born. Today we try to get away from this cradle, from this origin of the discourse, and it can lead to very dangerous situations.
En dus mag niemand uit The Wealth of Nations citeren zonder dat citaat te omringen en te ondersteunen door minimaal twee citaten uit The Theory of Moral Sentiments. Niemand. Vind ik.
Zie ook: Hoe Brian dankzij Annejet de kans kreeg te illustreren wat het verschil is tussen economische modellen en de realiteit
February 6, 2019
You will find this book controversial at the very least. Sometimes, it’s illogical, repetitive, and purely structured.
Still, I highly recommend to read this book for its anti-mainstream spirit. The author has brought brilliant questions everyone should ask him/herself once in a while.
Still, I highly recommend to read this book for its anti-mainstream spirit. The author has brought brilliant questions everyone should ask him/herself once in a while.
September 5, 2017
I will confess that i didn't really read this from cover to cover but I enjoyed dipping in and out
Capitalism is messed up man....
Capitalism is messed up man....
July 14, 2019
Kdybych tuhle knihu četla v septimě/oktávě na gymplu, kdy jsem měla seminář z filozofie, aspoň trochu bych tehdy věděla, o čem je řeč.
Read
March 9, 2025schumpeter mention jumpscare
May 16, 2017
This was a pretty good book but it didn't quite get to the level I was hoping. The main premise is that the field of economics has become too dependent on math and data and has become disconnected from other fields such as moral philosophy and theology. In other words, it's become to disconnected from real life. The author spends the first half of the book showing how people in the past saw economics through these very different lenses. The author then uses these sources to show how modern day economics can fail when it becomes overly rational or empirical. Rationalism fails because there is no true starting point. No one is perfectly objective and at some points everyone must fall back on unproven assumptions, i.e. faith. Empiricism is also inadequate because data always requires interpretation. It is very easy for one economist to look at data and draw a completely different conclusion than the person before him. We have all seen how statistics can be manipulated to say whatever one wants, as well has random correlations that may or may not be causation. As the author repeatedly states, he does not want to stop using math and data, but simply wants to recognize other fields that can also help us to better understand economics. It is the people who think that math is the only way to do economics, and that everyone can be boiled down to data that he wants to critique.
One of the main problems I have with the book is that he never or rarely names the people he is arguing against. He is constantly talking about the failures of modern day economists, but rarely gives specific examples. If he had been able to show some of the failures that happened because of over reliance on statistics and how moral philosophy would have improved understanding, the book would have been much more powerful. Finally, in his discussions and mentions of Christianity I felt he made some inaccurate interpretations that felt sloppily researched and explained. He often quotes Augustine and Aquinas as representatives of Christianity, which I have no problem with. But later in the book he makes an argument based on an Open Theistic interpretation and doesn't seem to recognize that it's a blatant contradiction of the Christianity of Augustine and Aquinas.
Overall I enjoyed the book and learned a lot from it. I thought it showed an impressive breadth of knowledge to be so well versed in many literary works while at the same time having a strong grasp on the field of economics. I tend to agree with his main arguments though I believe they could have been made more effectively. For all of these reasons I give the book 4 stars.
One of the main problems I have with the book is that he never or rarely names the people he is arguing against. He is constantly talking about the failures of modern day economists, but rarely gives specific examples. If he had been able to show some of the failures that happened because of over reliance on statistics and how moral philosophy would have improved understanding, the book would have been much more powerful. Finally, in his discussions and mentions of Christianity I felt he made some inaccurate interpretations that felt sloppily researched and explained. He often quotes Augustine and Aquinas as representatives of Christianity, which I have no problem with. But later in the book he makes an argument based on an Open Theistic interpretation and doesn't seem to recognize that it's a blatant contradiction of the Christianity of Augustine and Aquinas.
Overall I enjoyed the book and learned a lot from it. I thought it showed an impressive breadth of knowledge to be so well versed in many literary works while at the same time having a strong grasp on the field of economics. I tend to agree with his main arguments though I believe they could have been made more effectively. For all of these reasons I give the book 4 stars.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 177 reviews