Economics and Classical Liberalism
- Posted by Andrew Bailey on Tuesday, December 19, 2006 at 12:13 PM
| 
4 Comments |
The title of this post asks whether learning economics makes students more conservative (that is, classically liberal). And the reasons given for a positive answer strike me as good ones. At least, they parallel my own experience. The first time I saw a chart illustrating how supply and demand interact to determine price in a free market was a light-bulb moment, and I commend the experience to all. In short, people who've studied economics recognize that state interference with markets carries with it lots of baggage and uncontrollable consequences. I take the existence of such baggage to be a fact in some strong sense.
While the relevant specialists (economists) tend to be classical liberal in their leanings, the academy as a whole is not. There's an interesting asymmetry in this situation, I think. It's sometimes suggested that academic folk are more liberal (and here I don't mean this in the classical sense) because contemporary liberalism is the truth. And of course, the commonly given answer is that there are other sociological facts (peer pressure) that explain this phenomenon far better than the Truth Hypothesis. So the Truth Hypothesis has little force, the story goes.
The Truth Hypothesis has more force in the case of classical liberalism and economics, though, I think. Classical liberalism isn't a particularly popular view in the academy as a whole. I suppose there's a payoff in the subdiscipline of economics for being a classical payoff, but this is far offset, I imagine, by the costs one pays with respect to the academy as a whole.
I say all of this, of course, with due trepidation. I am no sociologist, nor do I have any advanced training in economics. =)
4 Comments:
Daniel at 1:30 PM said... Don't try this line of thinking at home - these are trained professionals...
Noumena at 2:39 PM said... Although many contemporary economists are loathe to admit it -- especially not in their Intro classes -- what they study is usually not the actual economy. Instead, they propose mathematical models -- like the neo-classical supply and demand curves -- that make sweeping assumptions in order to make the models tractable. Those neo-classical supply and demand curves, for example, presuppose that agents are fully rational egoists and that the market is in a state of perfect competition. The resulting models are easy to work with, but the assumptions make them so far removed from the complexities of the real world that they're all but useless as guides for public policy. Witness the spectacular failures of neo-liberal economics as a development model for South and Central America and Eastern Europe, for example.
If you like, you can claim that contemporary mainstream economics (very much neo-classical or neo-liberal) has access to truth insofar as they prove true theorems about their mathematical models. But it doesn't follow that they have any true, real knowledge about what makes for good public policy.
Matthew at 5:34 PM said... "While the relevant specialists (economists) tend to be classical liberal in their leanings, the academy as a whole is not. There's an interesting asymmetry in this situation, I think."
I remember a row in my high school between my senior AP Micro-econ teacher and my AP Gov teacher--a conservative/liberal divide, respectively. Now that I am immersed in the world of the latter, the world of the liberal humanities, I can't help but notice how their (my colleagues, etc.) econo-political leanings are determined by their social convictions, but never vice versa.
Andrew Bailey at 4:11 PM said... "If you like, you can claim that contemporary mainstream economics (very much neo-classical or neo-liberal) has access to truth insofar as they prove true theorems about their mathematical models."
That's right; but mathematical models are only one part of what the modern economist is up to. Engaging in elaborate quantitative analysis is part of joining the professional guild and one aspect of the profession, but doesn't seem to me to be anywhere near the core of the discipline.
