christianreader | Only two books this month!

I know I didn't knock out much this month, and you'd think that wouldn't be the case since I haven't been teaching. I've gotten well into some heavy stuff this month, though, so I bet next month will be much, much more. :)

1. American Nerd: The Story of My People by Benjamin Nugent Nugent has produced a high-quality, entertaining read about what he calls "my people"--and I guess they're mine, too. _American Nerd_ is a wide-ranging discussion of what makes someone a "nerd", from the first appearances in writing of the pejorative itself to the physiological origin and allure of nerdlike activities. Other than a couple of odd jaunts into questionable psychoanalysis, this one is absolutely worth your time for its look into an interesting and oft-maligned subculture that has more influence on today's culture than you might first imagine.

2. Predictably Irrational: The Hidden Forces that Shape Our Decisions by Dan Ariley is a good writer whose book catches onto the _Freakonomics_ craze by taking a look at times when people make different decisions that typical "laissez faire" economic theories would expect. His book is a fairly easy read and does include some surprising results through social-science experimentation.

However, the text is not without its flaws. For instance, some of the breathlessly-reported "surprising" results aren't all that surprising or even controversial. For instance, the effect of a "free" item on consumer decision-making is vastly overstated as irrational. This idea is old-hat to most and doesn't make much of a point. More troubling, however, is the unstated difference between this brand of social science and pure economics, and the author states such at the end of the text: the ultimate goal of such discovery is to alter and market certain things that are "beneficial" to most people into "free lunches" which are irresistable to the average Joe.

Here is where pure economics gets it right: there is no such thing as a "free lunch", no matter what social economics claims. The buck always stops somewhere. If people are going to make "better" decisions about things, someone somewhere is going to decide what "better" is. And if someone else is deciding the terms of this "better", it no longer falls on the individual to do so.

It is true that human beings cannot always be protected from themselves. If this is true, then this is tenfold true for random human beings (usually via government nannyism) who force "better" upon all people, rational or otherwise. Ariely never tries to face this dilemna, and it weakens the conclusion of the book considerably. This is an entertaining read, and worth your time as a second or third go at _Freakonomics_-like thought, but it doesn't hold a candle to the original.

Total Books This Month: 2
Total Books This Year: 17