Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #60193 in Books
• Published on: 1986-07-01
• Original language: English
• Number of items: 1
• Binding: Paperback
• 379 pages

Customer Reviews

A book that promises much, but remains too theoretical and lacks the reality check in the real world
This book is written by Thomas C.Schelling who received the 2005 Nobel Prize for Economics for his work in understanding conflict and cooperation through game-theory analysis. This edition is a re-publishing of his 1984 book, with minor modifications (and it is not really a hard hardback either). It consists of 15 essays, more or less laid out in pairs and covering topics such as - Ethics & Self-command, Living & Dying, Criminals & Organised Crime, and Game Theory & Nuclear Threats. I was really looking forward to reading this book after being disappointed with Freakonomics - moving from a "rogue" to an "errant" economist looked like a good idea. Starting with the first 2 essays on "Economic Reasoning and the Ethics of Policy" and "Command and Control" I was immediately disappointed, firstly by the style and secondly by the content. It is probably true to say that the first 2 essays along with 15th essay on "The Mind as a Consuming Organ" are the weakest and most dated. The style problem is a matter of taste but I simply found the essay format a little to imprecise and informal for many of the topics discussed, and I might add I also found the content a little US-centric for what is supposed to be an international bestseller. Setting aside this problem, I also had a problem with the content. The author spends a considerable amount of time talking through and around the topics, looking at each issue from a multitude of different angles and perspectives, including a dose of repetition. I found this very heavy in the first 2 essays, but I will admit that I enjoyed the same approach in the 5th and 6th essays on Life & Dying. Much depends upon your initial understanding of an issue - the more you understand something the more you what the author "to get to the point" and the least you will like the discursive essay format. It is a bit like describing the fence before sitting on it. A bigger problem is in that the author does not take the issues into the real world. He does not say what people (politicians or public policy experts) have actually done with a particular strategic analysis, what was their real-world experience, what were the practical pros and cons, and what might be considered as a best/better solution. There were several essays introducing game-theory analysis to problems including the nuclear threat. I am certain that you can find better introductions to game theory, however the application to different facets of the nuclear threat was interesting.
To conclude this is certainly better than Freakonomics but only just. I can only recommend it if the reader really knows what he is buying. I personally was disappointed with the essay style and with the overall lack of commitment to the application and critical assessment of strategic economics and game theory to public policy decisions actually made in the real world. It was still all a little too "ivory tower" for me. PS I loved the statement made in the 1st essay "that most people are better at spending their own money than somebody else is at spending it for them".