quest for knowledge

You know that cliché saying about: the more you learn, the less you realize you know? It's hitting me hard. I have read bits and pieces of a few articles and intros to books and realize how much and how many disciplines are involved in my chosen field. I may be decently studied in econ, but there are sub schools of econ and conflicts between them that I was unaware about. Anthro and Ethnography are entire fields upon themselves that I must gain proficiency in.

But, simultaneously, I truly am learning more. It forces me to constantly reevaluate what I wish to pursue and what I want to write about.

Consider this:

Economics (in the traditional sense, which typically still captures the majority of the field) tackle the issues of progress and innovation as such. Innovation is necessary for progress and growth. The mechanisms for stimulating innovation are issuing patents to guarantee monopoly and subsidies or other forms of monetary compensation. By economic standards, the innovations we produce are far too few. The number of innovations we create are said to be “inefficient” (the notion that the sum of societal costs are not equal to the sum of social benefits). Society would gain, as a whole, if we were able to convince people, who are primarily motivated by profit, to undertake these tasks. But, the values involved in such a model are values of A WESTERN SOCIETY. Economic Anthropology would argue that a society with a differing value set, in which “the base” (Gudemen), a set of norms, culture, and other defining aspects of a people, could have a more efficient number of innovations. If I lived in a society in which my values put my community ahead of myself, I would think not of my own gains (personal or Private Benefit) but that of society as a whole (Social Benefit). Thus, I would gain value from pursuing the innovations because I value my community because of the norms and morality instilled in me.

Though this analysis is starkly different from that of traditional Econ, this is not at all inconsistent with some aspects western society! Consider teachers, social workers, people that do nothing but surf, the homemaker and others. Each does not solely pursue the profit motive. Each puts a certain weight on wages (probably considering some subsistence wage, for the surfers and homemakers, it would depend on their support systems). And each puts weight on another facet of life, be it teaching children, helping others, surfing and being at home with the kids (also, eliminating costs of fast food, cleaning services, babysitters, and other functions which can be seen as part of the profit motive).

There is a varied distribution of people and their respective values of differing aspects of life. Economic Anthropology is a cognizance of this fact that tries to add to the Economic models without taking away their validity within the western sphere.

Traditional econ tenets include that people want to maximize their utility (happiness) and that in “a perfect system”, if everyone tries to do so, we will reach a point of efficiency. This “perfect system” is one where everyone’s incentives line up perfectly. Every choice I make, I must feel the full costs. This Econ-Anthro analysis is consistent with traditional econ but realizes that value we get form a choice is a function of culture.