"If morallity represents how people would like the world to work, then economics shows how it actually does work." — Freakonomics
Seeing is believing. But what happens if you don't see? *Vsauce moon man music starts playing*. Then is not seeing is not believing? What does it mean to see? How do we know we believe or if we have seen all there is to see? How do you confuse everybody including yourself in the first 20 words of a glorious book review. Who knows? What is knowing? Writing this review in my sleep deprived state in the middle of class, naturally causes these questions to sporadically appear into my mind as if my mind ate some of those popping candies we all used to eat as a kid. Sweet, sharp and tongue-shredding — the three greatest adjectives I've personally assembled. In the future we will never truly know what my mental state was like in the process writing this introductory paragraph.
...Yeah reading this back we can reasonably assume it wasn't great.
Anyway, Freakonomics isn't about GDP forecasts, yield curves or how atlantic salmon futures will contribute to the downfall of the Argentinian lithium industry. It's a book that really makes you suspicious (so exactly right up my alley). I thought I was already a pretty skeptical person, you know naturally pretty curious and uhh... has trust issues but after reading this book my cynicism (jk) has taken a whole new level.
In short, this book is about analyzing human behaviour through data. Sounds kinda boring, kinda like something that would written by some egotistical professor that writes in the dialect of English that no one understands (academic writing). But this book isn't written academically at all, although Levitt is an academic he doesn't write like one. The book is concise and takes on a very conversational tone which makes it a rather quick read.
The book doesn't tell one continuous story, rather it is split up into little chunks that seek to inform the reader about a few fundamental ideas:
All these ideas are told through little stories such as: What schoolteachers and sumo wrestlers have in common? Or what makes a perfect parent? Or why drug dealers still live with their mothers? The non-uniform approach to writing this book makes the book, ironically, feel more fluid and moving. Instead of focusing one central argument or theme, it shifts and moves giving every chapter a freshness and mystery which makes this book addictive and easily consumed within a couple reading sessions with very little reading fatigue.
I seriously learnt a whole lot from this book at it's inspired me to keep moving forward and look for truth. The irreverent, leisurely writing, is strangely comforting and motivating, kinda giving you the confidence, the greenlight to seek things out for yourself even when the crowd tells you not to.
