Scan barcode
A review by branch_c
The Rational Optimist: How Prosperity Evolves by Matt Ridley
3.0
As I’ve said before, I generally like Ridley as a writer, and he gets credit for being intellectually honest about his positions. I agree with him about many things, including the rational optimism of the title. For those who tend toward pessimism, it’s absolutely worth reading the well-reasoned and data-supported opinions of optimists like Ridley and Pinker (The Better Angels of Our Nature). It’s demonstrably true that humans have better lives overall than we have at any point in our history.
On the other hand, Ridley also has some positions I don’t entirely agree with, the most important being the criticality of climate change. He’s clearly done his research, and like many writers, he picks studies and anecdotes that fit his narrative - that the worst case scenarios for climate change are extremely unlikely, and that some of the steps being proposed to fight climate change are doing more harm than good. I appreciate reading work that challenges my preexisting opinions, but in this case, although I don’t have the background to argue against him, there are too many scientists who do for me to be swayed.
Ridley’s antipathy toward big government is also based on solid research, but in this case it’s primarily the history of what has worked and what hasn’t in the past. He makes an excellent case for the solutions to significant social issues having been solved by trade, the free market, and the power of individuals to innovate. But while he allows that government has done some good in the past, he views it historically as parasitic on the achievements of individuals. The fact that there have historically been more bad governments than good ones is no reason to give up on the attempt to form new ones that are better equipped to solve our problems.
Ridley predicts continuing growth, continuing adaptation of humans to changing environments, and increased prosperity as a result. While I agree that optimism is valuable, I think he downplays potential problems such as climate change that need to be rationally considered even while holding an overall optimistic attitude. Considering the numerous examples provided in this book of (pessimistic) predictions in the past that turned out to be wrong, the optimistic predictions should also be taken with a grain of salt.
Ultimately I think Ridley puts too much faith in the idea that what has always happened before will continue to happen in the future. For example, he doesn’t address concerns about the development of AI (although to be fair, this book was written in 2010, four years prior to Bostrom’s Superintelligence).
Again, I share the author’s overall optimistic outlook, and I think it’s appropriate given our history, but it’s also important to continue to think seriously about problems that have never been encountered before; after all, it’s by doing that, and not by passively waiting for someone else to work things out, that humans have achieved the many historical successes described in this book.
On the other hand, Ridley also has some positions I don’t entirely agree with, the most important being the criticality of climate change. He’s clearly done his research, and like many writers, he picks studies and anecdotes that fit his narrative - that the worst case scenarios for climate change are extremely unlikely, and that some of the steps being proposed to fight climate change are doing more harm than good. I appreciate reading work that challenges my preexisting opinions, but in this case, although I don’t have the background to argue against him, there are too many scientists who do for me to be swayed.
Ridley’s antipathy toward big government is also based on solid research, but in this case it’s primarily the history of what has worked and what hasn’t in the past. He makes an excellent case for the solutions to significant social issues having been solved by trade, the free market, and the power of individuals to innovate. But while he allows that government has done some good in the past, he views it historically as parasitic on the achievements of individuals. The fact that there have historically been more bad governments than good ones is no reason to give up on the attempt to form new ones that are better equipped to solve our problems.
Ridley predicts continuing growth, continuing adaptation of humans to changing environments, and increased prosperity as a result. While I agree that optimism is valuable, I think he downplays potential problems such as climate change that need to be rationally considered even while holding an overall optimistic attitude. Considering the numerous examples provided in this book of (pessimistic) predictions in the past that turned out to be wrong, the optimistic predictions should also be taken with a grain of salt.
Ultimately I think Ridley puts too much faith in the idea that what has always happened before will continue to happen in the future. For example, he doesn’t address concerns about the development of AI (although to be fair, this book was written in 2010, four years prior to Bostrom’s Superintelligence).
Again, I share the author’s overall optimistic outlook, and I think it’s appropriate given our history, but it’s also important to continue to think seriously about problems that have never been encountered before; after all, it’s by doing that, and not by passively waiting for someone else to work things out, that humans have achieved the many historical successes described in this book.