What do they have in common? A
fascination with homo economicus,
this unfriendly character who has been described as an “unattractive, inhuman
and sociopathic fellow”, whose marching strength heads the parade of economics towards
rationality, wealth and prosperity, at relentless pace. What could be more
promising than a man like that? Silence
follows the question and there is no answer to it anywhere near.
Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832), himself a kind of
victim of Dr. Frankenstein, is the creator of homo economicus. Bentham donated his body for a public autopsy to
the faculty of Medicine of the University of London, a School created by
Bentham and supported with his state. To this day at important meetings of the
School Bentham’s body is ushered into the hall with the announcement: “Mr.
Jeremy Bentham is present at the procedures without vote.” We could bear in
mind Bentham by saying that, according to some economists, his creature homo
economicus is present today in all procedures of life, without ever being
able to change his stiff condition.
No one likes to represent his whole
life as a homo economicus, except for
a while. Most people recognize that not all of their decisions are rational nor
are they only profit-seeking. Bentham was enamored of economics but forgot that behind it there are imperfect fallible human beings. One can do lots of theory and
models without men but one cannot do real economics without human beings.
And that is where Paul Samuelson (1915-2009) comes in. He took homo economicus and
turned him into mathematical models. By that we understand what Peter Boettke calls
the inferiority complex of economists to natural sciences. Keynes was responsible
of this as seen in the name of his work “General Theory”, a la Einstein.
Samuelson contributed by applying the mathematics of thermodynamics to
economics. In 1947, based in the principle of Chartelier, he established “the
method of comparative statics for economics”. In response to that many have
said that “physical economics” explains things that have no application or use
in reality since their theoretical origins suggest that things happen by
themselves without connection to human actions and decisions.
And that last sentence helps us
to bring in Gary Becker (1930- ), who is credited by doing the most interesting things
in economics in the last quarter of a 20th century that is, applying
economics to every thing. The question is what kind of economics. You guessed it the
homo economicus version of the
discipline. We marry to maximize utilities or for exchanging purposes, have
kids for the same reasons, and believe in God to increase our chances in
eternity. It is in this context that love, justice and faith are proposed by D.
McCloskey as also part of this humane science called economics. She puts it in
one odd-sounding but promising word, which has far greater depth than homo economicus, “humanomics”.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario