Bryan Caplan, "'Market Fundamentalism' Versus the Religion of Democracy"

Questions for Making Connections within the Reading:

1. Caplan devotes his energies to defining two terms in this piece: market fundamentalism and democratic fundamentalism. What definitions does he settle on, finally? What does he place “market fundamentalism” in quotation marks, but not democratic fundamentalism?

2. Caplan both advocates and demonstrates a mode of argumentation that does not shy away from the charge of “arrogance.” Indeed, he declares openly that, “Economists really do subscribe to a long list of views that are unpopular, even offensive.” What views, in particular, does he mean and to whom are they offensive? Where do you see him working self-consciously to avoid the charge of “arrogance” and where do you see him falling pray to this charge?

3. Throughout his piece, Caplan refers repeatedly the role that “slack” plays in lives of those who participate in the market—professors, those who work in print, voters in a democracy. What is “slack” exactly? How is it produced and experienced? 

Questions for Writing:  

1.  “[T]here is no conceptual flaw in prescriptions to rely more on private choice and less on collective choice.” With this conclusion, Caplan rejects the arguments of those who believe that the best hope for social improvement lies in collective action. If an argument about the nature of human behavior has no “conceptual flaw,” what follows?  Is Caplan’s commitment to the economic model an example of a private choice or is it the inevitable outcome of the reasoning process or is it a sign of what Caplan terms “rational irrationality”?

2. Caplan proposes that one remedy to the problems of democracy could be addressed the improving the economic literary of those who vote. Indeed, he even suggests limiting voting rights to those who demonstrate economic literary. Caplan does not, however, provide a textbook definition for what he means by “economic literacy” nor does he offer a list of the central concepts and core skills that he would like to see taught. Drawing on the materials Caplan has provided, generate your own version of what would go into an exam on economic literacy, including the central concepts, core skills, and correct answers that would be covered in such an exam. If such an exam were used to limit access to voting, what do you think would follow? What do you learn about Caplan’s model by filling out what his recommendation would look like in practice?

Questions for Making Connections Between Readings:  

1. Caplan singles out William Greider as a prime example of a democratic fundamentalist. For rhetorical reasons, Caplan provides but one quote from Greider to substantiate his claim; Greider himself would doubtless use different terms to characterize his position. Indeed, in “Work Rules,” he sets out to explore “the promise and the difficulties” involved in “self-ownership.” That Caplan and Greider have different views of economics is clear, but what leads them to have such different views? Are they working with different facts? Different assumptions? Different beliefs? Different modes of argumentation? Rather than choose sides, write an essay that explores the source of the disagreement between Caplan and Greider. What would it take to resolve this disagreement?

2.  In “Surface and Substance,” Virginia Postrel makes the following observation about what might be called human superficiality: “Denying that we care about appearance for its own sake leads us to exaggerate its deeper significance, in order to justify our natural interest.” Is Postrel’s view of the human condition in line with Caplan’s? Does the study of the marketplace require that one focus only of the surface of human behavior or does it reveal the substance of what it means to be a member of human society?