The roots of this question actually originated a few months back. In a conference on regional economic communities held in Beijing, an Australian colleague began his presentation by stating 'I'm actually not an economist.' Somehow, I think this was a warning to the audience (who were mostly economists) that his analysis will not be using any formal models or extensive exploration of data and statisticsl tools. But I thought he had his hands on the ball and was perfectly able to present the economic issues at stake. And then I asked him "what makes an economist anyway?" He and I threw in a couple of thoughts and but didn't come up with a definite reply. ....But today, my brother, again asked the same question. Basically his was "is it profession (training, what you do) or academics (formal educational degree) that makes you an economist?
So...I guess this is a poll : what makes a person an economist? Possible suggestions of mine listed below...
1. A degree (any degree) in economics?
2. A graduate degree in economics?
3. An affinity to numbers?
4. An extensive portfolio of research in economics?
5. The ability to formally express theories in a mathematical equation?
6. A reader of 'The Economist'?;-)
7. A person that favors reliance on self-regulating forces of the market?
I don't know, honestly....I do know that we somehow love to emphasize that our views on almost any matter are seen from 'an economic point of view' ;-)
Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Saturday, February 24, 2007
Why my brother reads Mankiw in his spare time
I belong to the sub-set of people who do not function very well in the morning. I need significant amount of time and caffeine to 'collect my soul' (ngumpulin nyawa would be the slank term in Indonesian) before I can march onwards and brave the day.
My brother, on the other hand, seems to be fully-charged come daylight. He reads the paper religiously and not just the news, also features, commentaries, business, op/eds- and he seems to digest everything in one gulp. A lot of what’s on the news are economic issues. Let’s do a quick inventory of some of them : the politics of import rice bans, the slow pace (or stagnant?) of the real sector recovery, micro-financing, why banks are ‘banking’ on the generous SBI interests instead of giving out lending to businesses, free-trade agreements, etc.
On more than a few occasions, always in the morning, he would greet me with something like this, ” Hey, Puspa, you’re the economist here- can you explain to me what’s meant by this person’s argument? He says that free-trade benefits the country’s citizens more through imports than by exports, what does this mean? What channel and how’s that possible?”
Another one would be something like “Puspa, the papers keep saying that the economy is stagnant, the real sector isn’t moving, but on the other hand, new shopping malls keep sprouting everywhere, is this not a sign of real sector activity???”
His sister must sadly disappoint him as (a) she just cannot deal with these things in the morning (not without that cup of espresso at least), (b) she’s just not good at orally articulating ideas and theoretical explanations without a proper trigger. Each time I try explain something, he poses more and more questions, questioning the assumption behind every explanation or providing counter-examples to the arguments and ideas that I tried to explain.
“Come on , Puspa, you gotta explain these things to me, I am not literate in macroeconomics, help me out here,” he said. Then I had a brilliant idea. One morning I came down to our living room with Greg Mankiw’s Macroeconomics in tow.
“Here you go, Bang—have fun!”
He seemed to appreciate my gesture. So he’s now reading Mankiw in his spare time, claiming to be more and more absorbed and enjoying the well-written book and learning the theories that are explained in a very digestible format. Aaaah, wonderful, I thought. I can enjoy my slow morning soul-collecting activity of leisurely reading the paper while I sip my beautiful home-made espresso…..
But, wait a minute! Now he actually goes on to questioning the theories!!
“Puspa- I just don’t get it, this National Income and Circular Flow thingy. Basically, if what it is earned from the production process of a good is equivalent to what we spend to make it, where’s the room for profit then?”
Yikes! Ok, ok, I get the message. My brother’s got the right approach- don’t be a lazy thinker who takes everything at face value: keep questioning, arguing, reasoning….I’m actually happy that knowledge-enthusiasts like him exist to keep on challenging thoughts.
But can we maybe do this in the afternoons or evenings, brother of mine? ;-)
My brother, on the other hand, seems to be fully-charged come daylight. He reads the paper religiously and not just the news, also features, commentaries, business, op/eds- and he seems to digest everything in one gulp. A lot of what’s on the news are economic issues. Let’s do a quick inventory of some of them : the politics of import rice bans, the slow pace (or stagnant?) of the real sector recovery, micro-financing, why banks are ‘banking’ on the generous SBI interests instead of giving out lending to businesses, free-trade agreements, etc.
On more than a few occasions, always in the morning, he would greet me with something like this, ” Hey, Puspa, you’re the economist here- can you explain to me what’s meant by this person’s argument? He says that free-trade benefits the country’s citizens more through imports than by exports, what does this mean? What channel and how’s that possible?”
Another one would be something like “Puspa, the papers keep saying that the economy is stagnant, the real sector isn’t moving, but on the other hand, new shopping malls keep sprouting everywhere, is this not a sign of real sector activity???”
His sister must sadly disappoint him as (a) she just cannot deal with these things in the morning (not without that cup of espresso at least), (b) she’s just not good at orally articulating ideas and theoretical explanations without a proper trigger. Each time I try explain something, he poses more and more questions, questioning the assumption behind every explanation or providing counter-examples to the arguments and ideas that I tried to explain.
“Come on , Puspa, you gotta explain these things to me, I am not literate in macroeconomics, help me out here,” he said. Then I had a brilliant idea. One morning I came down to our living room with Greg Mankiw’s Macroeconomics in tow.
“Here you go, Bang—have fun!”
He seemed to appreciate my gesture. So he’s now reading Mankiw in his spare time, claiming to be more and more absorbed and enjoying the well-written book and learning the theories that are explained in a very digestible format. Aaaah, wonderful, I thought. I can enjoy my slow morning soul-collecting activity of leisurely reading the paper while I sip my beautiful home-made espresso…..
But, wait a minute! Now he actually goes on to questioning the theories!!
“Puspa- I just don’t get it, this National Income and Circular Flow thingy. Basically, if what it is earned from the production process of a good is equivalent to what we spend to make it, where’s the room for profit then?”
Yikes! Ok, ok, I get the message. My brother’s got the right approach- don’t be a lazy thinker who takes everything at face value: keep questioning, arguing, reasoning….I’m actually happy that knowledge-enthusiasts like him exist to keep on challenging thoughts.
But can we maybe do this in the afternoons or evenings, brother of mine? ;-)
Monday, February 12, 2007
My Best Friend is an Atheist
My best friend is an atheist, I am a liberal muslim. By liberal, I mean I adhere to the belief in God and stick to practicing the very basic properties of Islam (shalat/daily prayers, fasting and zakat). I care less about the other dos and don’ts. He is a non-believer but has read both the Bible and the Qur’an inside out. I have never even finished reading the Qur’an. His understanding and knowledge on the history of religion surpasses mine significantly. Nevertheless, I think I can safely say that I am a firm believer in the existence of God and Islam, just as he is a firm believer in the absence of God and the power of reason.
Between our meals, coffees and drinks, many hours have been spent debating, arguing and discussing about religion, religiosity and religious behavior. We no longer live in the same city, but bytes and bandwiths still manage carry our thoughts across the ocean and provide us with a medium to exchange our views. So when I read this post from a friend on the internet, my immediate reaction was to forward the link to said best friend.
As expected, another debate ensued. He respects believers, and has never in any way belittles me and my belief, but he has a problem with the indomitable nature of religion. To him, religion does not want to be questioned nor criticized: religion IS, period, and can often drive fanatic believers to do irrational things. Reason on the other hand, is dialectical. It thrives for perfection the more and more you question it. Unlike religion, so he said…
How can I possibly accept that? How can I explain to him that for me, religion has been the exact opposite of that : the more I practice it, the more I feel that I’ve come closer to becoming a better person…. the more I practice it, the closer it brings me to my private dialogue with the Superior Being up there? How can I explain that I could not have survived many dark episodes and extremely low points in my life without my belief in God?
Then suddenly it occurred to me, that perhaps he and I weren’t exactly on the same wave length, perhaps we were comparing apples with bananas. I stumbled upon this post earlier, then it hit me. What kept me going so far was not my religion, but my Faith in God or what we in Indonesia would call iman. My faith in the existence of the Superior Being, above and beyond this universe, is what has helped me to escape some of the darkest episodes of my life. Faith in God has put me at ease, and established my continued assurance that in the very, very, very long run, this will work out for the best. It always has and it always will. What is religion then? Religion is a collection of teachings, a ‘how-to-get-to-know God’ kit. Without religion, without the properties of practicing shalat and fasting, I perhaps would not have found it in me, this faith in God…..
That of course, is my very own understanding of the word religion. But it surely isn’t that of those who plant suicidal bombs that killed hundreds of people. In fact, religion can and has been interpreted in many, many different and conflicting ways. But I think to fully comprehend this behavior, one must understand that in many aspects, religion has become a culture, an identity, one that is guarded carefully. If being a Muslim is what defines you, then yes, you would naturally want your kids to marry other muslims. If certain religious teachings have made what you are today, and the values and norms (i.e. never eat pork, never have pre-marital sex, never drink alcohol) are the values that you were brought up with, then you would naturally want to abide by it and demand that your environment understands that. If one believes that Prophet Mohammad is a noble man, one would naturally be angry at cartoon images that mock him. Sadly, one can also use religion as a justification of ill-behavior (and yes, I am talking about polygamy here!)
So there we have it, I finally admit that he is not entirely wrong ;-). Will we ever stop debating and arguing? I don’t think so. His decision to become an atheist was a conscious one, just as much conscious and aware as mine to become a believer. We’ll always be reading into things through different lenses. Besides, we are both conscious nerds who enjoy bickering and debating and fighting to have the last word in an argument. He usually wins though, and I resort to articulating in a blog, to appeal to other parties ;-)
Between our meals, coffees and drinks, many hours have been spent debating, arguing and discussing about religion, religiosity and religious behavior. We no longer live in the same city, but bytes and bandwiths still manage carry our thoughts across the ocean and provide us with a medium to exchange our views. So when I read this post from a friend on the internet, my immediate reaction was to forward the link to said best friend.
As expected, another debate ensued. He respects believers, and has never in any way belittles me and my belief, but he has a problem with the indomitable nature of religion. To him, religion does not want to be questioned nor criticized: religion IS, period, and can often drive fanatic believers to do irrational things. Reason on the other hand, is dialectical. It thrives for perfection the more and more you question it. Unlike religion, so he said…
How can I possibly accept that? How can I explain to him that for me, religion has been the exact opposite of that : the more I practice it, the more I feel that I’ve come closer to becoming a better person…. the more I practice it, the closer it brings me to my private dialogue with the Superior Being up there? How can I explain that I could not have survived many dark episodes and extremely low points in my life without my belief in God?
Then suddenly it occurred to me, that perhaps he and I weren’t exactly on the same wave length, perhaps we were comparing apples with bananas. I stumbled upon this post earlier, then it hit me. What kept me going so far was not my religion, but my Faith in God or what we in Indonesia would call iman. My faith in the existence of the Superior Being, above and beyond this universe, is what has helped me to escape some of the darkest episodes of my life. Faith in God has put me at ease, and established my continued assurance that in the very, very, very long run, this will work out for the best. It always has and it always will. What is religion then? Religion is a collection of teachings, a ‘how-to-get-to-know God’ kit. Without religion, without the properties of practicing shalat and fasting, I perhaps would not have found it in me, this faith in God…..
That of course, is my very own understanding of the word religion. But it surely isn’t that of those who plant suicidal bombs that killed hundreds of people. In fact, religion can and has been interpreted in many, many different and conflicting ways. But I think to fully comprehend this behavior, one must understand that in many aspects, religion has become a culture, an identity, one that is guarded carefully. If being a Muslim is what defines you, then yes, you would naturally want your kids to marry other muslims. If certain religious teachings have made what you are today, and the values and norms (i.e. never eat pork, never have pre-marital sex, never drink alcohol) are the values that you were brought up with, then you would naturally want to abide by it and demand that your environment understands that. If one believes that Prophet Mohammad is a noble man, one would naturally be angry at cartoon images that mock him. Sadly, one can also use religion as a justification of ill-behavior (and yes, I am talking about polygamy here!)
So there we have it, I finally admit that he is not entirely wrong ;-). Will we ever stop debating and arguing? I don’t think so. His decision to become an atheist was a conscious one, just as much conscious and aware as mine to become a believer. We’ll always be reading into things through different lenses. Besides, we are both conscious nerds who enjoy bickering and debating and fighting to have the last word in an argument. He usually wins though, and I resort to articulating in a blog, to appeal to other parties ;-)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)