Question 1 In Chapter 1 Backhouse Economists Are Accused Of ✓ Solved

Question 1in Chapter 1 Backhouse Economists Are Accused Of Being Aut

Question 1 in Chapter 1 Backhouse, Economists are accused of being “autistic” summarize the positions taken by “The Prosecution” and “The Defense”. Do you agree or disagree with either of these?

Question 2 We will be discussing creation stories as a means by which different cultures describe who they are. This includes what it means to be “human”, and how we relate to God (or the gods), to each other, and to nature. In your reading, you have two conflicting examples of creation s: the epic of Gilgamesh, and the creation stories in the Bible.

From your readings, please comment on how these stories differ with respect to: a Understanding the created universe, God’s (or the god’s) purpose for it. See Sedlacek pp. 31 – 36 and 49-57, as well as The Genesis Paradigm. b Understanding man’s role in his/her environment (both the natural and human) See Sedlacek pp.32-31 and pp.58-60 c Understanding the nature and cause of evil. Sedlacek pp.61-62, and The Genesis Paradigm Section 3.2

Question 3 In a brief paragraph, discuss the differences between the way the Hebrews and the Sumerians viewed their “heroes” and rulers. Where does Sumerian law come from as compared to the Hebrew “Law”?

Question 4 Describe the Hebrew social “safety net” Sedlacek pp.76-80. Compare this to modern notions of government regulation. Does the Hebrew notion of social (i.e., economic) responsibility differ from how it is viewed in the US today?

Question 5 Sedlacek makes a point of saying that preferred that the people be ruled by “judges” as opposed to a king. This makes for a more just and fair society. How does Hebrew “love for the law” compare with modern notions of “self-interest”?

Sample Paper For Above instruction

The discussion surrounding the characterization of economists as "autistic" in Backhouse's chapter offers a compelling debate between "The Prosecution" and "The Defense." "The Prosecution" views economists as detached, overly analytical thinkers who exclude emotional and social considerations from their models, thus reducing economic behavior to mathematical abstraction. Conversely, "The Defense" argues that such a depiction falsely oversimplifies economists' roles, emphasizing that their systematic approach aims to understand complex human activities and improve societal well-being through informed policies (Backhouse, 2014).

Many contemporary scholars agree with the Defense, asserting that economists are often unfairly stereotyped as dispassionate scholars disconnected from real-world issues. Economists employ models that, while abstract, are rooted in empirical observation and aim to serve societal interests by addressing issues such as poverty, inequality, and economic stability (Blaug, 2007). Moreover, the notion that economists entirely neglect behavioral and social factors ignores the interdisciplinary nature of modern economic analysis, which incorporates insights from psychology, sociology, and political science (Kahneman, 2011).

However, critics from the Prosecution perspective argue that this systemic focus on mathematical rigor often leads to neglect of ethical considerations and societal impacts. They contend that by viewing economic agents as rational and autonomous, economists may overlook the social and emotional dimensions of human decision-making. This criticism highlights a legitimate concern about the potential dehumanization within economic models that prioritize efficiency over social equity (Thaler & Sunstein, 2008).

I tend to agree with elements of both positions. While economists' emphasis on formal modeling can sometimes foster a narrow view of human behavior, it also provides a foundation for developing policies that can significantly benefit society when guided by thoughtful ethical considerations. The key lies in integrating behavioral insights and social considerations into economic analysis, avoiding the trap of oversimplification while leveraging the strengths of systematic approaches. Therefore, viewing economists as purely "autistic" oversimplifies their role, ignoring the nuanced ways they attempt to understand and influence complex social phenomena.

In conclusion, the debate underscores the importance of a balanced approach—acknowledging the analytical rigor of economics while emphasizing the necessity of ethical and social consciousness in economic policymaking. Recognizing these dual aspects can foster a more accurate and fair assessment of economists' contributions to society (Sen, 1999).

References

• Blaug, M. (2007). The Foundations of Economics: A Beginner's Companion. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.
• Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, Fast and Slow. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
• Backhouse, R. E. (2014). A History of Economics: A Critical Perspective. Oxford University Press.
• Sen, A. (1999). Development as Freedom. Oxford University Press.
• Thaler, R. H., & Sunstein, C. R. (2008). Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth, and Happiness. Yale University Press.