Economics as Religion - Ppr.

This is an excellent book by a professional economist who makes the case that modern neo-classical economics is highly ideological or religious in content as opposed to being composed of truly scientific endeavors. He views modern economics as being a form of religious artistry (with lovely mathematical expressionism) as opposed to being a truly scientific endeavor in a Newtonian sense. He quotes one wag, approvingly, that modern neo-classical economics suffers from "physics envy." It would seem that Professor Nelson stretches the meaning of "religious" to cover the underlying values of modern day economic thought and social theory. While I agree, that very, very much of our modern day value system is derived from the Western Christian tradition that provided much of the historical moral and ethical foundations of this country, I would be hesitant to extend the "religious" term quite as liberally as Mr. Nelson. My personal preference would be to focus on the ideological foundations of modern Neo-Classical economics as opposed to its claimed "scientific values" foundation. I know that ideology and religion are often closely related, however, I am reluctant to admit that Neo-Classical, Keynesian, Institutional, even Marxian economics can be adequately defined in religious terms. All of them employ religious elements. However, the derivatively religious values are brought in thru the backdoor--not glaringly thru the front entryway. Catholic, Calvinist, Pentacostal, etc., etc. economic ideas are not the primary focus of these religions--God is.... I would rather have a debate and discussion centered around the nature of the differing values underlying the different schools of economic thought than about why Calvinist economic ideas should trump Catholic ideas. That's an argument that I would personally prefer to avoid. I definitely do not want to be ruled by any official Christian sectarian economic school of thought. I am a firm believer of the Enlightenment values upon which our wonderful democratic institutions are based. I know, as the author points out clearly, that many of those values were translated from Christian values and put in a more secular form (backdoor religion, once more). However, I do believe that sticking to such secular forms in terms of economic schools of thought provides a more hopeful venue for decent political and civil debate and disagreement concerning economic ideas. The one thing for certain is that no one is going to agree upon what is properly "God's Will" in terms of His (or Her) desire for our economic destiny. Mr. Nelson finishes his book with a very approving endorsement of Frank Knight as being the most significant 20th century economist. I plan to read more of Knight to see if I am so impressed. The author also concludes that perhaps libertarianism and environmentalism will be the triumphant "religions" (or my preference, "ideologies") of the future. Personally, I find the vast majority

This is a brilliant intellectual history of late 20th century American economics which puts it in both American and European historic context. It is both erudite and immensely practical in helping one to see the limitations in recommendations of economists more clearly. As a former international banker (and a mathematician by training) who has lived both in Europe and the Far East, the practical limits and occasional parochialism of American mainstream economics have long been clear, but except for George Stiglitz' "Globalization and Its Discontents", I can't think of any book that does a better job of explaining just what is wrong and why. Read them together and be prepared to think hard about the difference beween what we really "know" about (international) economic behavior and what we merely believe.

This is a remarkable book... erudite, opinionated, original, and addressing a crucially important subject matter. Prof. Nelson covers a wide swath of recent economic thinking (that survey alone makes the book worthwhile), and contends that while economics wears the cloak of authority of science, it can more accurately be viewed as a secular religion. I had read one of his 1980s articles, and picked up the book on that basis - and became thoroughly engaged. If one measures success in terms of underlined sections, exclamation points and scribbled notes in the margins, then this one more than passes. I'm not an economist (or a theologian), but nonetheless found this to be a tremendously interesting read. I wanted more, and hope that his next book follows up on his closing point, about the cutting edge role of libertarians and environmentalists.

Prof. Robert Nelson argues that economics has become the modern religion, complete with a priesthood (economists), a sacred text (Samuelson's "Economics") and a plan of salvation, (material progress will solve the problem of mankind, including the problem of sin.) Over the top, you say? He makes a great case. Read this book and find out for yourself. I am a professional economist myself. Nelson's arguments ring true in my experience in the profession. He argues that many of the controversies over economic policy are really controversies over views of the world. These world views are so fundamental, and deeply held, that they are unlikely to be dislodged by technique and data, no matter how rigorous. Nelson thinks we would have more fruitful policy discussions if we would quit pretending to be scientists, and face up to these fundamental questions. I have to agree with him. I wish he had pointed out that economics is not doing a very good job being a religion. Material progress can not solve all the problems of the human race. We would all be better off, if we would admit that.

Ever wonder how the field of economics could produce such disparate voices, from interventionists such as John Maynard Keynes to the classical liberalism of Milton Friedman? Those looking for insights will do well to read Economics as Religion: From Samuelson to Chicago and Beyond by Robert H. Nelson, an economist at the University of Maryland.As the book's subtitle suggests, Nelson takes the reader on tour of modern economic thought. Here he's done commendable job, providing a highly readable account of the major personalities. This book will appeal to historians as well as the informed non-specialist. Nelson ranges far and wide in his effort to explore the often unstated philosophical assumptions behind supposedly objective economic analysis. Of particular interest is Nelson's treatment of the rift between economists and environmentalists. He places the debate squarely (and rightly in my opinion) in religious terms. While this is not particularly original, he does a service by reinforcing the deep religious roots of modern American environmentalism. Finally, in an increasingly small world, Nelson again hammers home a vital point regarding economic opportunity provided by free markets: Economic progress requires the creation of a "civil society" and the rule of law. Social and human capital must be both nurtured and sustained. Laws must reflect these norms and governments must enforce them fairly. Without these, human rights and the environment suffer. In environments of rampant corruption and political instability, value creating institutions aren't sustained. Success comes when people are rewarded for creating value, not for transferring wealth via force or fraud. Political plunderers, not the market process, keeps countries poor.This is a desperately important message at a time when many equivocate and ring their hands about the spread of Western democracy as, "a hegemonic discourse of Western cultural imperialism". Pete Geddes is Program Director of the Foundation for Research on Economics and the Environment (FREE) and Gallatin Writers. Both are based in Bozeman, Montana.