Skip to main content

Basic Instincts - Pete Lunn ****

I don't know why it took so long to review this book - it has been on my shelf for a few years and now it's out of print. But I'm still reviewing it, because it should still be on the shelves. It's just possible that in that time it has become a little out of date... but I have a horrible suspicion that it hasn't. Pete Lunn (himself an economist) absolutely tears the guts out of traditional economics.

 Although much of the central argument is also made in the excellent Economyths, there was more here I've never seen before.  What Lunn shows is so disastrous is the way that economics clings onto the bizarre idea that people always act in a way that is selfish, rational and based on perfect information. And what's particularly fascinating about this book is the way that Lunn shows that economics, which calls itself a science, behaves rather like the ancient Greeks often did - depending on a clash of theories, without ever doing any experiments to test those theories. The experimental side has primarily been left to psychologists and sociologists, while the economists simply ignore the results and plough on with their disastrous fiction regardless.

 Lunn uses as a model a pair of imagined towns - Marketopia and Muddleton, showing how people would behave if they were as traditional economics portrayed them, compared with reality. He also relates how a few mavericks down the years have tried to get something closer to reality. How, for instance, in the 1930s an economist actually talked to business managers about how they made decisions, rather than basing his economic theory on models. He found there was no resemblance between what firms did and how economists assumed they behaved. For example, according to traditional economics, prices should be set by the market. In reality, businesses worked out their costs and added what they thought was an appropriate markup with very limited reference to the market. And yet, the ship of economics has sailed on regardless, driving the policies of governments and central banks, using these bizarre unreal models.

 There is a small suggestion of change. Lunn shows us how some economists, for example, have at least challenged the 'perfect information' aspect and tried to see how not having perfect information would alter behaviour - but there is still primarily an assumption of selfish, 'rational' behaviour - where the economist's idea of 'rational' often simply isn't what human beings consider to be sensible.

 It's not a perfect book. It's written more like a business book that a science book, which means taking a lot of lines of text to make fairly simple points. It's rather repetitious too. But Lunn has a warm, approachable style and you can forgive him for being a little dull, given the quality of the content.

 Given this book has been around several years, the sad news seems to be that economists have still not got the message. Our economic advisors remain too dependent on traditional views of markets and on assuming people and companies will behave like the model, rather than researching how people and companies really behave and modifying the model to fit observation. It's arguable that this failure of economics is responsible for most of the economic mess we're in today, from the crash of 2008 to the rebellions of those who feel that the establishment doesn't care enough for them. We've been listening too much to conventional ancient Greek style economics and not enough to scientific economics. It's time for a change, and Lunn's book ought to give us a great lead in that. But somehow, I doubt it will.

 Hardback:  

Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you

Review by Brian Clegg
Labels:

Comments

  1. psbraterman17 July 2017 at 12:12

    THE book on this is surely Kahneman, Thinking Fast and Slow. In a delightful example of self-reference, Kahneman, having got the Nobel Memorial prize in economics for showing that people don't act on rational self-interest, gave nearly all the money away.

    Morningstar gives extra credit to companies that avoid traditional competition-based market economics altogether, by building a moat based on their special position.

    And increasingly, we have major players (from Amazon to Uber) who makes their money by inserting themselves between supplier and consumer.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The AI Paradox - Virginia Dignum ****

This is a really important book in the way that Virginia Dignum highlights various ways we can misunderstand AI and its abilities using a series of paradoxes. However, I need to say up front that I'm giving it four stars for the ideas: unfortunately the writing is not great. It reads more like a government report than anything vaguely readable - it really should have co-authored with a professional writer to make it accessible. Even so, I'm recommending it: like some government reports it's significant enough to make it necessary to wade through the bureaucrat speak. Why paradoxes? Dignum identifies two ways we can think about paradoxes (oddly I wrote about paradoxes recently , but with three definitions): a logical paradox such as 'this statement is false', or a paradoxical truth such as 'less is more' - the second of which seems a better to fit to the use here.  We are then presented with eight paradoxes, each of which gives some insights into aspects of t...
Post a Comment
Read more

The Laws of Thought - Tom Griffiths *****

In giving us a history of attempts to explain our thinking abilities, Tom Griffiths demonstrates an excellent ability to pitch information just right for the informed general reader.  We begin with Aristotelian logic and the way Boole and others transformed it into a kind of arithmetic before a first introduction of computing and theories of language. Griffiths covers a surprising amount of ground - we don't just get, for instance, the obvious figures of Turing, von Neumann and Shannon, but the interaction between the computing pioneers and those concerned with trying to understand the way we think - for example in the work of Jerome Bruner, of whom I confess I'd never heard.  This would prove to be the case with a whole host of people who have made interesting contributions to the understanding of human thought processes. Sometimes their theories were contradictory - this isn't an easy field to successfully observe - but always they were interesting. But for me, at least, ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Einstein's Fridge - Paul Sen ****

In Einstein's Fridge (interesting factoid: this is at least the third popular science book to be named after Einstein's not particularly exciting refrigerator), Paul Sen has taken on a scary challenge. As Jim Al-Khalili made clear in his excellent The World According to Physics , our physical understanding of reality rests on three pillars: relativity, quantum theory and thermodynamics. But there is no doubt that the third of these, the topic of Sen's book, is a hard sell. While it's true that these are the three pillars of physics, from the point of view of making interesting popular science, the first two might be considered pillars of gold and platinum, while the third is a pillar of salt. Relativity and quantum theory are very much of the twentieth century. They are exciting and sometimes downright weird and wonderful. Thermodynamics, by contrast, has a very Victorian feel and, well, is uninspiring. Luckily, though, thermodynamics is important enough, lying behind ...
Post a Comment
Read more