PHIL252
Spring 2017
Philosophy of Money
Here is the course syllabus.
Check back periodically for additional readings or information. Scroll to bottom for new posts!
For week of 1/24 -- chapter VIII of Carl Menger's Principles of Economics -- on line here, and G. F. Knapp's The State Theory of Money (1924) -- PDF here (pp. 1-44)
You'll recall from the syllabus that I will be posting questions for weekly
response. These need be no longer than a paragraph, provided that they
demonstrate active engagement with the material. They may be direct
answers to a question, or sometimes a question or reflection of your own.
These can simply be an email to me, but (a) send it from your BSU account as
opposed to your personal account, and (b) put "Weekly response #x" in the
subject line, where x=the actual number. Email them back to me by Sunday
afternoon. So:
Weekly response #1: this
short video combines an account of money's origins with an explanation
of inflation. Is this analysis Mengerian? Explain. Is inflation
contrary to money's purposes?
For next week, read this from Ludwig von Mises -
his book The Theory of Money and Credit
is available entirely online, here:
http://www.econlib.org/library/Mises/msT.html --read Part 1.
For Thursday, read chapter 1 of Simmel's book.
Weekly response #2: on page 73, Simmel makes an analogy with aesthetic
value. Explain what he's trying to show, and whether you think the analogy
works.
As we work through Chapter 3 of Simmel, Another work by Mises, Chapter 1 of
his book Human Action, is
directly on-point.
That's online too:
http://www.econlib.org/library/Mises/HmA/msHmA.html
Weekly response #3: what does Mises mean by "praxeology"?
How does Mises' understanding of human action compare with Simmel's?
Thursday, Feb 16, we will meet in the DMF Auditorium
(Science bldg 120) rather than our usual classroom so we can hear a guest speaker.
Roll will be taken, this counts as a regular class meeting.
For 2/28, here's some Marx to read, on
alienation:
https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1844/manuscripts/preface.htm
Mainly the "First Manuscript," and particularly the section entitled "Estranged
Labour" ("estranged" being another word for "alienated").
Weekly response #4: reflect on whether Simmel
or Marx is more accurately describing the effects of a money economy.
Additional reading for this week: the same link to Mises' book Human
Action, above, but now see chapters 11, 12, 25 and 26. Also, chapter I
of
Marx's
Critique of the Gotha Programme.
Here is a helpful short
video which helps illustrate the point about prices as information signal.
More sophisticated presentation in this famous 1945 paper by Hayek,
The Use of
Knowledge in Society.
You'll recall from the syllabus that in addition to the weekly responses, your
are to write two short papers (3-5 page range). No WR this week; instead
get started on the first paper, which is due March 17th. This should be a
WORD document (meaning a .doc or a .docx)
formatted thus: double-spaced, 1-inch margins, 12-point Times New
Roman font, page numbering on, your name, date, and PHIL252 top left of first
page - but then email it to me as an attachment from your @bridgew address.
Slides on
paper writing guidance.
This is due in my inbox 9:00 am March 17. Topic: Evaluate the role of
money (or its absence) in conveying knowledge in both the planned economy Marx
describes and in a market-driven system. Is Mises and Hayek's criticism,
the "knowledge problem," a valid one, or
does Marx have a better solution than Hayek and Mises understand?
Mises
again: "In an exchange economy, the objective exchange value of commodities
becomes the unit of calculation. This involves a threefold advantage. In the
first place we are able to take as the basis of calculation the valuation of all
individuals participating in trade. The subjective valuation of one individual
is not directly comparable with the subjective valuation of others. It only
becomes so as an exchange value arising from the interplay of the subjective
valuations of all who take part in buying and selling. Secondly, calculations of
this sort provide a control upon the appropriate use of the means of production.
They enable those who desire to calculate the cost of complicated processes of
production to see at once whether they are working as economically as others.
If, under prevailing market prices, they cannot carry through the process at a
profit, it is a clear proof that others are better able to turn to good account
the instrumental goods in question. Finally, calculations based upon exchange
values enable us to reduce values to a common unit. And since the higgling of
the market establishes substitution relations between commodities, any commodity
desired can be chosen for this purpose. In a money economy, money is the
commodity chosen."
Optional Saturday seminar in March:
Info here (extra credit opportunity - must register and sign in)
Week of 3/21: It's hard to imagine teaching a course like this and not including the famous
speech by Francisco D'Anconia on
the
meaning of money from Ayn Rand's 1957 novel Atlas Shrugged. Have a
look at that, and then have a look at
this essay by economist Steven Horwitz in which he explains the philosophy
of money underlying it.
We will return to a discussion of fiat money vs commodity-based money, and the
effects of inflation and other manipulations of money, later on.
Next unit for the semester is on inequality and state policy regarding money.
We will begin with the range of options for state redistribution of wealth: at
one end of the spectrum would be complete egalitarian redistribution; at the
other would be none whatsoever. Regardless of the morality of either
option, neither is remotely feasible politically. So while we may return
to a consideration of those, we should begin with options such as the existing
welfare state and its chief conceptual competitor, known variously as the UBI
(universal basic income) or BIG (basic income guarantee). Begin with
this overview. Pro piece
here.
Con piece
here.
Weekly response #5: is wealth inequality a serious problem? Why or
why not? Remember, just a paragraph for weekly response - here I'm just
looking for you to begin articulating your thoughts on this issue. Note:
question is about inequality per se, not poverty. So, e.g.,
if everyone were equal but poor, would that be ok? If no one were poor,
would you still care about the inequality?Weekly response #6: your reactions to Prof. Horwitz's lecture.
Weekly response #7: after looking at DeSoto's analysis of barriers to
mobility in the 3rd world, what parallels do you see with poverty in the US?
I mentioned we would come back to a discussion of cryptocurrencies; now seems
like a good time. Here are some readings on Bitcoin.
Tucker
More
Tucker
Carden
Patterson
Tucker again
Weekly response #8: your thoughts on Bitcoin, given
what we've learned this semester so far about money.
We talked in class about the idea that inflation and
stimulus spending are good on one model and bad on another - on the first, the
idea is that these are useful and possibly necessary tools to respond to a
serious situation; on the second, the idea is that these activities exacerbate
and are even responsible for the problems in the first place. The leading
proponent in the 20th century of the former is J. M. Keynes; his main
intellectual opposite is F. A. Hayek. For Keynes, here is a web
version of his book
The General Theory - minimally, read ch 22-24; optionally ch 3, 8-9, 16-17.
For Hayek, see the essay
"Reflections on the Pure Theory of Money of Mr. J. M. Keynes" and optionally
look around in his book
Pure Theory of Capital, esp. ch 26.
Interestingly, the Keynes-Hayek debate has been made into a
rap video
which accurately captures the basic arguments and even manages to include some
direct quotations. Be sure to watch this as well. Weekly
response #9: reflect on which model seems more plausible. Update:
Keynes-Hayek rap
battle round 2
NEW
Weekly response #10: will be emailed to you, due April 30. This
email will include what I wanted to cover Thursday. Again, sorry about the
scheduling mixup that results in my not being there.
FINAL PAPER ASSIGNMENT: as before, 3-5 pages is the range. Same
formatting and delivery instructions as the first paper (scroll up).
Due: 9:00am, May 8th.
Topic:
Choose ONE of these prompts.
(1) expanding on weekly response #9 - besides using inflation to cover costs such as war, some argue that it's
helpful to create inflation to relieve the burden on consumers with high debt.
Do you think so, or not? Why or why not?
(2) expanding on weekly response #8 - is it right to consider Bitcoin money, and is
it a good thing or not?