Journey to the Past

When Daniel Smail (On Deep History and the Brain) was last here giving a lecture, he led off with a discussion of Paul Seabright’s The Company of Strangers: A Natural History of Economic Life.  It sounded like an intriguing book—economics combined with Deep history.  What can we learn about economic behavior from the prehistory of Man?  How have economic institutions evolved?  The publisher blurbs added to the aura—here is a book which uses biology and history and anthropology to look at a wide array of economics institutions.  A grand integration of economics with, well, everything.  What could be more interesting?

How does the book measure up to my expectations about the book?  Sigh.

Seabright means well.  He really does.  But, the book suffers from the same problem I keep seeing in all the Deep History stuff—all tantalizing prospects, no payoff.  There is remarkably little in the book about ancient history.  Instead, the book rapidly becomes an exercise in showing that economic institutions evolve.  Shocking, that.  I lost all patience with the book when I hit the chapter on what caused the financial crises of 2008.  Really now.  A book promising a Darwinian history devolving into a pop analysis of the events of 2008.  Disappointing to say the least.

I assigned this book in my introduction to microeconomics class.  A few students liked it.  A few hated it.  I think the rest didn’t get past the first chapter. 

The book is not without virtues, though.  It really is interesting, as the title suggests, that humans engage in a large number of interactions with complete strangers.  That is a very bizarre fact from an evolutionary standpoint.  No other creature routinely engages in exchange with strangers.  How did that happen?  It’s hard to know—the history of that evolutionary movement predates written records—and so the book is at its best when thinking about how it might have happened.  The answer is a very Smithian (as in Adam Smith) tale of specialization and the desire to have trading partners.  It’s rather interesting to discover that Smith’s argument is actually supported by the historical record.  On the other hand, since Deep History is one part history and one part Just So story, it is impossible to eliminate a lingering fear that maybe Seabright is finding this specialization and trade in history because Smith suggested it was there.    

Of course, we could just learn about the evolution of economic institutions by watching the video record.  (By the way, I was scared, seriously terrified, of that show when I was a child.  I was excited when it started, but then in episode 2, when the Sleestak arrived, I was so frightened, I could never watch it again.  A few years back, I decided to confront my childhood fears by getting the show from Netflix.  I watched it (with the lights on) with my kids.  They have not yet stopped mocking me for being afraid of the Sleestak.  If you are feeling very brave, you can see the terrifying portion of that show here; but don't say I didn't warn you about how seriously terrifying the Sleestak are.)