Thank You Adam Smith.

Hey he never blamed Adam Smith for fried mars bars and KFC! I feel cheated.

quote:

---

I had an interesting philosophy discussion with the clerk at the gas station the other day. My question was this:
If Henry Ford had never invented the Model T, would automobiles later have been invented anyway, and would they have turned out to eventually "evolve" the same way?

---

What is it that you think Adam Smith "invented"?

what popular ideas and conclusions?

quote:

---

Lets get back to ideas.

---

Why? The thread is about Adam Smith - why do I want to have some wooly conversation about "ideas" in such a thread?

quote:

---

Smith did say that consumption was the sole end and purpose of all production.

---

And who and what was Adam Smith talking about when he said that? If you don't know, frankly you don't understand enough about Smith, his work or how the historical context framed his work to have a productive conversation on the matter.Edited by CK, : No reason given.Edited by CK, : No reason given.

check your email when you get a moment.

Maybe he got it his bright ideas while cottaging.

quote:

---

It's just that Smith represents what happens when humans invent currencies, and become greedy, and focus their lives on the gain of material "wealth".

---

But why do you single smith out - people were using money before Jesus.

quote:

---

He not only invented capitalism.

---

He did? When? Which specific bits of his work support that idea? Edited by CK, : No reason given.

Originally I was going to answer each of the points in the original post but I got bored with typing "nope pre-dated smith by XXXX".I've only got sooooo much time to waste on the net....

Yes I'm aware of "The Wealth of Nations" - I have three or four copies knocking around the place - what about it? Which bits do you wish to use as support? Just the broad themes will be fine.

deleted by author.Edited by CK, : No reason given.

quote:

---

Open reciprocity was very simple. If I lived near a forest and you lived near the sea, I could provide you with wood in exchange for you providing me with fish.

​

It became complicated when money was invented. For one thing, the reciprocity became fixed and closed.

---

What if you didn't have any wood or skills - what would you provide to the person at the sea? How is this not "fixed and closed"?

quote:

---

finally figured you out schraf.

​

You state premises, not arguments. Simple claims/questions without any supporting facts and evidence...

---

Em.. hello Kettle, this is pot, you are black. (I mean you have READ your contributions to this thread?)Anyway let's start with something simple (and clearly, this will be simple and straight forward work for a profound figure such as yourself who has described smith's work as "feeble" and therefore clear had been able to do read, critique and dismiss it).Since it seems we are discussing the fluidity of ideas and concepts that any particular aspect of Smith's work, let's start with something really simple. Just the broad trends and influences will be fine. We can get into the more complex stuff later.Edited by CK, : No reason given.Edited by CK, : No reason given.Edited by CK, : No reason given.Edited by CK, : No reason given.

Oh - that's it?Do you want to try again when you've finished the course? or do you want me to make the questions more basic?

quote:

---

It's not complex, it's for simple men, it's for squanderers, and wastrels, it's not worth my time

---

So why start a thread on it?I know Phat will promote anything with your name on it (and it's pretty shameful he did - an adult should look out for a child, not set him up to look a fool in front of people), but YOU want to consider how silly and immature it makes you look when you try and play the big intellectual and then have to blow off the questions because you don't have a sufficent level of education to engage in the conversation.It makes you look shallow and vain and confirms people's view that you are a silly boy who's read a few backcovers. Two threads in a row, you've done that.You've know "the boy who cried wolf"?You are the boy who cried "I've read it! I get it!"Get your brother on here instead - he's got the same arrogance but unlike you, he has at least something to back that up with.Edited by CK, : No reason given.Edited by CK, : No reason given.

quote:

---

He devised much of the current system existing today in "the cizilized world".

---

wrong - I'm almost close to calling you a liar, Have you reallyread smith, I'm not sure how someone who has could make such a statement.What did Smith think about regulation? What did he think about Capitalism? What did he think about Laissez-fairz economics?At least make your non-answer interesting this time, at least give it the illusion that you've read his stuff rather than just seen the name on a reading list or mentioned in a lecture slide.Edited by CK, : No reason given.Edited by CK, : No reason given.Edited by CK, : No reason given.

quote:

---

I have studied Smith in Western Civ. and AP American.

---

ah - I'm starting to see the problem.

quote:

---

I know what he's about, he is very important to our country, and to industry, and to competition, and to perpetuating this rat-race.

​

Free trade, competition, to work out problems. Where competition weeds out bad business right?

---

Let's just take one of those - free trade - the actual answer to "did Smith believe in free trade?" is "yes,no,depends". What you have to realise that at the level you are at (and ask anyone who works in education to confirm this), to fit everything into the syllabus and make it suitable for the level, a taught course will leave out all of the nuances of what Smith was saying. Within a taught course, you'd have to get to Master's level before you got beyond the pat "father of modern economics, believer in free trade etc etc". It's the same in virtually all subjects - all of the complexity is left out at your level otherwise it becomes unteachable.Without reading Smith, all you are doing is parroting material that simplifies his positions and place in history to make it easy to teach and easy to understand for a novice. I'll drop out at this point as your level of knowledge is too low to make this interesting for me. All you are doing is parroting the simplified version you have been taught.Stick to the dimestore guru stuff, it's vague enough that someone under twenty who's had a sheltered life might think you have something new or interesting to say.