No more than a look at the sociology section of any large bookstore to put their hands to the head: their shelves, rather than full of works worthy of a fruitful branch of scientific knowledge (either be academic, or informative), are populated by vacuous little characters reflections of fashion, tabloid news stories or vague proclamations committed against capitalism in general, and low funding in particular (prostitution, drugs, etc..), if not a mixture of the three. Between them lies a classic work of Durkheim along with some other drinking Weber tortured by teachers of students with little imagination.
Until a couple of years it was difficult to find the same scenario if one approached the economic section: four misclassified university textbooks that quickly gave way to the huge corporate narrative. I will not say the situation has markedly improved, but at least since the appearance of the famous and celebrated Freakonomics, informative examples of works written by academics and experts in this field of science have not only increased, to the delight of all those who want a fun approach to the dismal science.
"The Economist Naturalist" work of Robert Frank, Professor, Cornell University, is among the latter. Some time ago I finished the book about 275 pages, but not until today I have decided to dedicate a few lines.
If I were to highlight some of its virtues, I'd say this is a very educational book that should be basic, perhaps mandatory, for any student of economics, especially if it is in its first year of study (the more Later, the harder it is to undo the bad habits that brings academia). The book is nothing but a vast set of everyday examples (one per page / two pages) explained through framework of mainstream economics, a thematic and preceded by a small theoretical introduction.
often happens, as stated by the author of the book, that many of the students completing their studies in economics are incapable of putting into practice the basic concepts and explanations of the science (the author uses the example of the concept of opportunity cost). Anyone who has studied economics bitterly recall the systems of differential equations, regressions, the complex mathematical representations of each of the models etc. but have serious difficulties in describing the "seen with perspective gained over the years and the study of other disciplines, extremely simple theoretical conclusions derived from each of the models studied, not read and apply them to account for an event and daily routine (it's sad, but eventually resort to handy and very poor interpretation of a journalist in the pages salmon)
In this sense, the book of R. Frank is a mine. Train head to systematically apply the rationale of the interpretative frameworks of neoclassical economics, not to mention the recent contributions of psychology and the business world. Once these have been internalized, it is easier to make sense of the verbiage math and see the forest without getting lost among the trees. Manual is a real economic sense and a balm against the clumsy pedagogical practices adversely affecting the academy.
However, while reading the book has been a great experience (made me reflect on many issues and has opened my horizons in many areas where I have found ideas and concepts that completely ignored) I have no choice that point, albeit briefly, some buts-professional bias: rather than read a book, I fight with him: first, unlike the books that precede it, the answers to each of the small issues that arise by way of example, and that are the lifeblood and main content of the book are not scientifically substantiated and can be checked on a more rigorous. It is actually a compendium of results for the year that the author offers its students a first course, (unlock some principle of operating economics in everyday life) without delving deeper into the complexity of the issues discussed. It is true that some examples and explanations are really good: for example, the strategies pursued by companies to find customers indifferent to the price are very well illustrated (at least better than the heavy and academic explanations of Tim Harford in a book format and themes similar). No However, a huge number of them are clearly unsatisfactory. When the authors of Freakonomics proposed we certainly bizarre and counterintuitive explanation of the social world to refer bothered sufficient information, relevant literature, and a paper published the results of a scientific study that backed him. In this book, too often, you are missing something. That is in the best. At worst, one is struck by the simplicity of some explanations of thick brush strokes, if not the immediate rebuttal to the change of context (the United States to Spain) showing his obvious character and lack of vigilance against the epistemological common sense notions proponents of these proposals of scientific explanation.
And there comes my second criticism. The book will be excellent as a teaching tool for undergraduate students in economics or those who want to learn the tricky paths of the dismal science. I, as a former student of economics, I can vouch for that. However, it is certainly likely to generate in the reader a feeling of apprehension and comprehension of the social world is far from certain, especially if your training has been left out of any other social science (though this is not a problem with this book in particular, but the barriers that generates abusrdas becoming bureaucratic and parcel of the academy among the various scientific knowledge). Without wishing to dismiss the approach and method of mainstream economics (elsewhere I have argued vehemently against unjustified attacks or other heterodox sciences), or their rightful place at the time to explain the social (I'm the first to recognize and value the contributions and leading to economic fundamentals in explaining the social), I note that the explanations that they are still brings in many cases incomplete and reductionist, poor explanations that aim to reduce the complexity of the social world a difficult set of assumptions can account for it beyond the standard model say described. As in any social phenomenon, the explanations would be interesting spice notes of psychology, social psychology, sociology or anthropology, various branches of knowledge, from a multidisciplinary approach to facilitate the understanding of social phenomena in all its complexity (which may be that in many of the issues, is the explanation provided by the economy, and no other science, the most satisfactory, giving an account of the phenomenon in greater degree). On the other hand, it would be interesting to approach more deeply into the world really exists, the empirical, to check whether the observations and generalizations that occur are really such, or whether it is simply contario simplified versions and standards of what should happen is in the social world (or whatever it is, the treacherous and never epistemologically secure enough ", the term" common sense)
Economist
naturalist Robert Frank
Peninsula, 2008.
0 comments:
Post a Comment