I thought to myself, “How does the ‘bad’ economist do it?” Turning that into speech, I said to Henry, “Okay, what I hear you saying, basically, Henry, is that ‘bad’ economists must do better ‘powerpoint’ slides than good economists. I don’t know why they can do this. That’s a complete mystery to me. But, there’s an even bigger mystery. What I want to know is: how are these ‘bad’ economist able to be more plausible when what they say is in error?”
Henry responded, “The basic reason for this ought not to be mysterious. The reason is that the demagogues and ‘bad’ economists are presenting half-truths. They are speaking only of the immediate effect of a proposed policy or its effect upon a single group. As far as they go they may often be right. In these cases the answer consists in showing that the proposed policy would also have longer and less desirable effects, or that it could benefit one group only at the expense of all other groups. The answer consists in supplementing and correcting the half-truth with the other half.”
“Oh,” I groaned. “Well, good luck on that. But why is it so hard to do the supplementing and correcting?”
“To consider all the chief effects of a proposed course on everybody often requires a long, complicated, and dull chain of reasoning,” said Henry. “Most of the audience finds this chain of reasoning difficult to follow and soon becomes bored and inattentive.”
I don’t know what happened to me on hearing that. I just couldn’t help myself. I lost it. I burst out into a full guffaw. “Henry,” I screamed at him. “I know, I know. I feel like you have been making me crawl on my hands and knees over a field of broken glass. If it weren’t for the pain, I’d have gone to sleep a long time ago. I don’t know how I’ve gotten this far.” I got my heaving sides under control and said, “Well, I guess it isn’t just the pain, I am beginning to get your points. I’m sorry, Henry, please go on.”
Henry responded, “The basic reason for this ought not to be mysterious. The reason is that the demagogues and ‘bad’ economists are presenting half-truths. They are speaking only of the immediate effect of a proposed policy or its effect upon a single group. As far as they go they may often be right. In these cases the answer consists in showing that the proposed policy would also have longer and less desirable effects, or that it could benefit one group only at the expense of all other groups. The answer consists in supplementing and correcting the half-truth with the other half.”
“Oh,” I groaned. “Well, good luck on that. But why is it so hard to do the supplementing and correcting?”
“To consider all the chief effects of a proposed course on everybody often requires a long, complicated, and dull chain of reasoning,” said Henry. “Most of the audience finds this chain of reasoning difficult to follow and soon becomes bored and inattentive.”
I don’t know what happened to me on hearing that. I just couldn’t help myself. I lost it. I burst out into a full guffaw. “Henry,” I screamed at him. “I know, I know. I feel like you have been making me crawl on my hands and knees over a field of broken glass. If it weren’t for the pain, I’d have gone to sleep a long time ago. I don’t know how I’ve gotten this far.” I got my heaving sides under control and said, “Well, I guess it isn’t just the pain, I am beginning to get your points. I’m sorry, Henry, please go on.”
Henry’s face was slightly flushed, but, responding unabashedly, he said, “The bad economists rationalize this intellectual debility and laziness by assuring the audience that it need not even attempt to follow the reasoning or judge it on its merits because it is only “classicism” or “laissez faire” or “capitalist apologetics” or whatever other term of abuse may happen to strike them as effective.”
“Henry,” I said, repressing repeated urges to laugh out loud again, “I am overwhelmed. That was great material. Obviously, due to my thick headedness, you had to repeat yourself on the central lesson a number of times. By this time, I should have it down cold. But, in the present context, however, I think you need to get more specific. Can you give me one simple example of a commonly accepted fallacy and its effects?”
Henry nodded his head in the affirmative.
No comments:
Post a Comment