Freakonomics: A Rogue Economist Explores the Hidden Side of Everything
Steven D. Levitt is a professor at the University of Chicago, an author, a journalist, and teaches economics. Stephen J. Dubner writes for the New York Times and The New Yorker. While interviewing many journalists, Dubner noticed Levitt and they created Freakonomics together. The preface of the book tells us that the story is revolving around all kinds of modern world issues. Levitt’s curiosity as a “riddle of everyday life,” causes many New York Times readers to be interested in the topic. Both of the Author’s approach at this topic is to bring attention to daily life issues and the issues that are still going on.
About the topic
The main topic of Freakonomics are the major issues which are economical, moral, and social. As the authors explains their reasoning throughout each chapter through examples like cheating, crimes, abortions and many more. We learn that the problems causes a major part of life in decision making. Either making a good choice or a bad choice, Levitt advises, “An incentive is a bullet, a lever, a key: an often tiny object with astonishing power to change a situation”. This quote shows that making decisions is hard to do and that with a slight amount of being nervous can instantly change the situation in a second. Both the authors intended to draw readers like young adults, but mostly everyone in general who would possibly solve the most concealed secret. Since the book talks about buying houses and a better way at parenting, I believe that it was mostly intended for young adults to learn from. The authors explain, “Clearly, bad parenting matters a great deal. As the link between abortion and crime makes clear, unwanted children—who are disproportionately subject to neglect and abuse—have worse outcomes than children who were eagerly welcomed by their parents. But how much can those eager parents actually accomplish for their children’s sake”? This informs young adults and future parents about good and bad parenting have done to kids. The author targets young adults so they can learn what it takes for their children to become better parents in the future.
About the Author's Premises
Throughout the book, the authors keep on reintroducing the theme about not everything is what they seem is all about. The whole book keeps the reader thinking about what is going on and they strive to make them learn and understand how to think outside the box and become more certain about the number and conclusions that could possibly be made. Freakonomics achieved these goals by using numbers and charts for others to understand and for the readers to question these problems in their heads. They also analyzed the data in which case helps explain the causes that made these issues. Since they did great research on the issues, the book demonstrates an open-minded answer to all the problems that could be emphasized.
About the Author's Arguments
The evidence that the authors use are factual and mostly about statistics and it all supports their thinking. With the evidence that they stated, they try to make sure that the evidence that they give doesn’t create false conclusions. Like for example, when they talked about crime drops and the best way to be a better parent are specific evidence that could make people make false conclusions. Since their claim and evidence are completely all based on graphs and statistics, they have to make sure that the reader does not make any false conclusion. Throughout the book, Levitt and Dubner put in their point of view when they explained their argument. When they put their point of view into their argument, this creates the situation to become a bigger picture. The authors establish their credibility on these issues by incorporating their jobs into their writing to establish their credibility. “Morality, it could be argued, represents the way that people would like the world to work-whereas economics represents how it actually does work”. This quote back up the information about how they put their job into their writing. Also, this quote shows that they can incorporate their professions to establish their credibility.
Evaluation
Freakonomics is an objective according to the author’s purpose. Throughout the book, neither one of the authors provides any of their own opinions nor their assumption so that means that it is objective writing. Objective writing is writing that is normally based on facts for the whole world to see and see how the author is an economist and a writer for the news provides strong evidence that this is objective writing. “Economics is above all a science of measurement. It comprises an extraordinarily powerful and flexible set of tools that can reliably assess a thicket of information to determine the effect of any one factor, or even the whole effect”. This proves to us that the economy uses facts to form theories and predictions. The main topic of the book is that there are three important issues that we don’t see which is economics, moral and social and we need to explore the world to solve these issues that we never notice at all. Throughout the book, we learn that it is playing a major role in our decision making. The book maintains an implied focus because there was such a part of the book where they could have expressed more focus on. Since this book is mainly focusing on the mysterious works of the world, the two authors worked together to tackle the issues, and they achieved it by providing an answer to these issues. This book is intended for young adults but generally for everyone who wants to understand the issues that have still not been solved.
Significant Quotes
The author could have improved their argument by doing less explaining about percentagenumbers and instead put a data table. Doing this helps the reader understand what is going on. One of the reviews about Freakonomics says, “I find the writing style incredibly intolerable to follow. It's as if he just wrote out his thoughts as they were coming to him with no clear outline”(Goodreads). This quote shows that people feel the way about how both writers made their writing complex. The only thing they need to improve on is making it a more detailed and improved version of a way of explaining their theories. “Here is the conundrum: by the time most people pick up a parenting book, it is far too late. Most of the things that matter were decided long ago—who you are, whom you married, what kind of life you lead.” This can pave a positive way for a better society as it is not how the parent act causes their kids to do something, it is who they are. Positively, this book can alter society is by letting everyone know “the hidden side of everything”. For example, “When hazard is high and outrage is low, people underreact,' he says. 'And when hazard is low and outrage is high they overreact” This example shows a different point of view about precautions and hazards. Considering how they gave us a different point of view, I admit that this can alter society and probably give parents a different view. “The likelihood of death by a pool (1 in 11,000) versus death by gun (1 in 1 million-plus) isn’t even close: Molly is far more likely to die in a swimming accident at Imani’s house than in gunplay at Amy’s” With a different point of view, there could be a reduction lives kids have to lose for these crimes. “The second child, now twenty-seven years old, is Roland G. Fryer Jr., the Harvard economist studying black underachievement. The white child also made it to Harvard. But soon after, things went badly for him. His name is Ted Kaczynski.' This quote also paves a positive way for our society as even though he was raised in a poor neighborhood, he can still achieve greater success. “The typical parenting expert, like experts in other fields, is prone to sound exceedingly sure of himself. An expert doesn’t so much argue the various sides of an issue as plant his flag firmly on one side. That’s because an expert whose argument reeks of restraint or nuance often doesn’t get much attention. An expert must be bold if he hopes to alchemize his homespun theory into conventional wisdom. His best chance of doing so is to engage the public’s emotions, for emotion is the enemy of rational argument.' This quote provides a stronger statement about a positive way for the future as if we need to bring something up, we must have a solid ground on the issue.
Final Comment
Freakonomics was a fantastic book that I would reread to understand the major issues that are currently still a problem. For future research, I think the author should have done more research in certain areas of the book. Some areas where they could be doing more research when they talk about abortions. I felt like this book’s evidence lacked evidence that made it very difficult to grip on and to have a better understanding of the book. Another future research is that they should add more evidence so that it would create a stronger understanding for the reader. Throughout the book, the evidence was hard to understand, therefore they could have done a better job at explaining it more. Overall the book demonstrates a different point of view which I was not aware of. Seeing how incentives affect the way of decision making, why experts use information asymmetry, how a parent’s thinking can affect how their future children will act in the future, etc. I was able to see a different view of the present real world through economies.
