Freakonomics: Revised Edition
Authors: Steven D. Levitt & Stephen J. Dubner
Morality, it could be argued, represents the way that people
would like the world to work; whereas economics represents how it actually does
work. –Stephen Dubner
If you learn how to look at data in the right way, you can
explain riddles that otherwise might have seemed impossible. Because there is
nothing like the sheer power of numbers to scrub away layers of confusion and
contradiction. –Stephen Dubner
It wasn’t gun control or a strong economy or new police
strategies that finally blunted the American crime wave. It was, among other
factors, the reality that the pool of potential criminals had dramatically
shrunk. –Stephen Dubner
When people aren't compelled to pay the full costs of their
actions, they have little incentive to change their behavior. –Stephen Dubner
Amazon.com describes Freakonomics:
Which is more dangerous, a gun or a swimming pool? What do schoolteachers and sumo wrestlers have in common? How much do parents really matter?
These may not sound like typical questions for an economist to ask. But Steven D. Levitt is not a typical economist. He studies the riddles of everyday life—from cheating and crime to parenting and sports—and reaches conclusions that turn conventional wisdom on its head.
Freakonomics is a groundbreaking collaboration between Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner, an award-winning author and journalist. They set out to explore the inner workings of a crack gang, the truth about real estate agents, the secrets of the Ku Klux Klan, and much more.
Through forceful storytelling and wry insight, they show that economics is, at root, the study of incentives—how people get what they want or need, especially when other people want or need the same thing.
I listened to the audible.com version of this book, read by
one of its authors, Stephen J. Dubner. A few times while listening to it, I experienced
a bit of déjà vu. A few years ago I listened to Malcolm Gladwell’s The Tipping Point, which also uses data
to examine questions I’d never thought to ask but wish I had. Books like Gladwell’s
(Blink and Outliers are two of his other works) and Freakonomics are fascinating to read. I have a hard time putting into
words exactly how they make me feel, but it’s somewhere between ravenous and
insufficient. Listening to even ten minutes of any of these works makes me
hungry for more – I can’t seem to stop, as if I’m consumed by a need to find
out more, delve deeper, eat up every word dropped from the mouth of the author.
But as fascinated as I am by everything they say, I find
myself feeling completely insufficient as a human being. Why hadn't I looked at
these questions in this way? Why hadn't I thought to ask them? How is it that everything
they say sounds so obvious, yet they’re the first person to have broached the question
and gotten those exact results? When will I find the magic question and answer
that propels me to the status of Levitt and Gladwell? For surely there has to
be some as yet unasked question with as yet un-examined data that will clearly
lead me down the path to discovery.
I listened to every second of Dubner’s 6 hour and 55 minute
reading of the revised edition of his book, eyes wide and mouth agape head
shaking and nodding furiously with each point he made. I marveled at the
simplicity of the words and the complexity of the data. Yes, of course the
legalization of abortion in the 70s aided in the decrease of crime in the late
80s and 90s. Yes, of course sumo wrestlers are driven by the same motivation as
schoolteachers to cheat. Yes of course realtors will undersell your house more
often than not.
Rationally, of course, I know that everything Dubner says and
Levitt determines can likely be argued against by economists of a different school
of approach. But data presentation can be mesmerizing to someone not constantly
surrounded by it. And I was sucked in from minute one.
I checked out some of the reviews of the book, post-listen,
on Audible.com, from whence I’d downloaded it. The first one is titled "Good,
but be careful." I didn't have to read the review to know what the writer was
warning against. It’s easy to be pulled into Levitt’s and Dubner’s point of
view because that is the one being presented. It is much harder to listen
objectively and realize that everything – even cold, hard data – can be seen
and explained from more than one angle. Heck, Dubner even says something to that
effect within the book!
The second review that appears is titled "Interesting yet
lacks unity." Now this subject-line made me laugh: Dubner flat-out says in the
introduction that this book does not have a unifying theme. He says there is no
thread that runs through each subject matter attacked, unless you count "Odd Questions
Asked & Answered" as a theme. There is no single rigid approach to the data
or subjects addressed – the book tackles education, Sumo wrestling, gangs, drugs,
real estate, crime control and the importance of parents, among other things.
If, my friend, you choose to read this book – or to listen
to it, as I did – go into it knowing two things: 1) it will lack unity; and 2)
it will make you feel both incredibly intelligent and sufficiently stupid at
the same time. I don’t know how you will respond to that combination, but I for
one, loved it, and I’m pretty sure I now hold the keys to the universe and to the
void, keys for which I will never find the right locks.
My takeaway: Sometimes it takes more than having the right
answers – it takes asking the right questions! And yesterday’s 'Britney' is
tomorrow’s 'Waverly.'
No comments:
Post a Comment