Robert L. Heilbroner (1919–2005)

Curious about the theoretical insights of history's great economic minds? How about their financial troubles, sexual orientations, and eccentric views regarding extraterrestrial life? Perhaps one of the most engagingly written works of academic non-fiction, this highly readable classic covers the economic theories of Adam Smith, Karl Marx, John Maynard Keynes, Joseph Schumpeter, and others -- without skimping on the quirky biographical details and larger historical context. No stock tips, show more though, I'm afraid. show less

This is history of when what we call economics was still part of philosophy, with some more recent economists too. Each one is worth knowing about.

Later, in 2023, I learn that the seventh and last edition of Worldly Philosophers included a new chapter, chapter 11, titled "The End of Worldly Philosophy?". It discusses "end" in both of its possible meanings, as termination, and as purpose or goal.

Heilbroner mentions how economics has become very mathematical, with lots of numbers and theories. show more That's fine, he thinks. What disturbs him, though, is economists who believe their field is a science like physics. Humans, with our free will and emotions, and ethics, and values can't be described in the same way that, say, electrons can.

He hopes for an economics that more and more realizes that it is linked to politics more than to physics, and one that realizes it is not value-free, an economics with a sense of social responsibility. show less

I've had this book on the shelf for over twenty years. I purchased it for an Intro to Macroeconomics class but I must not have read it at the time – or maybe we only had to read a small part because I found my annotations in only one chapter – but I decided to pick it up again and I'm very glad I did. Heilbroner looks at the great (and not-so-great) economists from Adam Smith down to John Maynard Keynes. And he truly tells you about their "lives, times and ideas" and makes the history show more come alive. Not only does he tell about Smith's "Invisible Hand" and supply and demand but also how he'd sometimes go into these trances where he'd end up marching for hours before coming out of it! And you learn about Keynes' insights into economic depressions (which may explain our current economic malaise) as well as his dalliances with men. There's also many in between, including some of the 'nuts' like Robert Owen, Henry George, and Thorstein Veblen. And, of course, there's Karl Marx.

The section on Marx is probably my favorite because Heilbroner makes you see the world Marx and his theories came from – as well as how often he was right! He points out that Marx "was not the architect of actual socialism" – that was Lenin – and it's so insightful that it almost makes me want to read Capital! In fact, the whole book was utterly fascinating. Heilbroner doesn't just explain economic ideas or even merely put them into context, he does it in a way that entertains, and he even made me laugh! My copy is from 1986 and it would be interesting to see what he'd thought of the collapse of communism just a few years later (maybe it was updated in a later edition?). (Modified from my 2/10/15 blog posting:http://bookworm-dad.blogspot.com/2015/02/marx-maynard-and-dr-dick.html) show less

Some years ago i used to dislike (or even hate?) economics. I was not into that field anyway but even my slightest attempts to get in touch with the field were problematic. This was because i was probably not convinced that it was a scientific discipline or was unable to comprehend the "why" behind some economic theories (let alone the theories themselves) and thought of economic theories as boring. Needless to say that even not in my wildest dreams would i consider economists as show more philosophers.

Today, i don;t have the same opinion. In fact today i believe more or less the opposite.

What did happen that triggered this change? I just red this book.

Is it an accurate book on economic history? I don't know. Does it cover all important milestones of economic history adequately? Don;t know either. But what i do know is that it makes a very good case in convincing the reader that all the questions of "why" behind economics theories go far beyond profit, interest and similar domain specific concepts. It seems that economics is yet another way of manifesting the relationships, osmotic phenomena and interactions that are active within a society. In portraying the ideas of some economic thinkers its rather easy to witness this. But the interesting thing that the book also makes clear is how the different thinkers attempted - to express it in a worldlys philosophers way - not only to explain the world but also to change it. In such sense economics seemed to be a tool with which a society can be engineered rather that simply explained. Perceiving this dimension of economics was rather new to me. And of course the form the tool has depends heavily on the context of its conception and use: the form of the society and the life/habits of the tool-maker itself. The book makes each economic theory - as awkward as it may sounds - emerge naturally out of their contexts. Why is Marx's system so "brutal" and remorseless? Why would someone like Thorstein Veblen write a book entitled "The theory of the leisure class" ? How did Schumpeter come to the notion of Innovation? (and why is the main development plan of the European Union based on his ideas ?). The answers to these questions now look obvious. show less