Richard Gunderman on Greed, Adam Smith, and Leo Tolstoy

Intro. [Recording date: March 9, 2022.]

Russ Roberts: Immediately is March ninth 2022 and my visitor is Richard Gunderman. He’s Chancellor’s Professor of Radiology, Pediatrics, Medical Training, Philosophy, Liberal Arts, Philanthropy, and Medical Humanities, and Well being Research at Indiana College. Richard, welcome to EconTalk.

Russ Roberts: Our subject for at present is greed as seen by way of the work of Adam Smith and Leo Tolstoy with some Hobbes thrown in. I wish to begin with the Tolstoy story–that you centered on in your essay–“Grasp and Man.” And, earlier than I start, for listeners, if you have not learn the story but, please do earlier than you go any longer on this episode. Simply hit pause if you happen to can. The story is a masterpiece. You’ll be able to solely learn it as soon as with out realizing how it is going to prove, so take into account pausing and studying the story. Yow will discover it on-line, a superb translation. We go have a hyperlink as much as it with this episode, however once more, you possibly can simply Google ‘Grasp and Man Tolstoy’ and you can see it.

I additionally wish to suggest the exceptional e-book by George Saunders, A Swim in a Pond within the Rain, which is an evaluation of numerous Russian brief tales and it is wonderful. Go learn it, even if you happen to don’t love Russian tales. He received me to love Chekov–I by no means did. Saunders is a grasp instructor and if you happen to learn his e-book, you’ll really feel such as you’re in his classroom.

So, Richard, let’s begin with the character of Vasili. I do not know the best way to pronounce it. If you wish to appropriate that, please do. What sort of particular person is he? What can we learn about him? And, what does Tolstoy need us to consider him?

Russ Roberts: And, there is a kind of particular person like that. And, I believe Tolstoy would say, all of us have a bit of little bit of that in ourselves. We get pleasure from materials success. And, I believe within the case of Vasili, he likes maintaining rating. It is not simply that he is received a pleasant comfy life–which he does. He is received a few coats and his poor servant, who he’s going to spend this night, that the story relates, has one, and it is received holes in it. So, there’s this distinction continuously within the story between the grasp, Vasili, and his servant Nikita.

Nikita has little or no. The truth is, he is typically in debt, both due to his ingesting issues previously. He is put these, it appears, behind him, when the story begins. However as an worker of Vasili, he is typically getting–he’s getting paid in sort. He is received a really robust materials life. His spouse resides with another person and his child–and his life has quite a lot of troubles. And, on the floor, Vasili appears to be remarkably comfy. What do you suppose Tolstoy needs us to consider this man, Vasili?

Russ Roberts: Yeah, I believe he actually says–Tolstoy actually says–that Vasili thinks of his son as his inheritor.

Now, after all, he is his inheritor, presumably. However, the truth that he expresses it in that language is a means of claiming that he sees him as an object–the conduit by way of his wealth will movement. What’s unsuitable with that? I imply so, okay, so Vasili is a bit of bit materialistic. He is actually into sharp dealing. He enjoys very a lot getting a deal, making the most of somebody in negotiation–literally making the most of them or ideally out-negotiating them. However, he is very keen to chop quarters[corners?] if he can.

We’ve got a reasonably vivid image of the person, I might say. So, what’s unsuitable with that? I imply, what is the huge deal? So, he is into cash. Is there an issue with that?

Russ Roberts: The truth is, his relationship with Nikita is basically fairly extraordinary. There is a handful, 10 possibly, possibly two handfuls of dialog between the 2. The entire story takes place on their journey to this grove of bushes on a windy and snowy evening. And, I did not rely them on my Kindle, however the phrase ‘snow’ is talked about a unprecedented variety of occasions, as is the phrase ‘wind’ or ‘windy’.

And, if you happen to do learn the story, I like to recommend that you simply learn it in a heat place, ideally with an enormous fireplace blazing, as a result of you are going to get chilly studying the story. A part of the artistry of the story is that in some ways, it is repetitive. It is intentionally repetitive. And sometimes that wears out the reader. On this case, to me, it simply deepens and enforces–reinforces–the classes and possibly we’ll come again to that.

However, okay, so he is a pointy vendor. He likes negotiating and making the most of different individuals. I used to be going to say, he brags to himself that he will promote the horse at a value that is means past what it is truly value. However, he is form of leaning Nikita and Nikita is his worker and Nikita did not have quite a lot of choices in life, so it is form of a tricky deal to show down. Nikita is aware of he is being taken benefit of. We get his interior ideas that, ‘Yeah, this is one other time the boss goes to make the most of me.’

And, the half that is [bittersweet?]–sort of tragicomic about it’s that Vasili acts like he is a great man. Like, he thinks fairly effectively of himself. It is not simply that he is actually nice at enterprise and negotiating, however yeah, he treats individuals fairly pretty, roughly, is the way in which it form of describes it. And, says so to poor Nikita, who form of shrugs, takes it, and strikes on. It is not the very best relationship.

Russ Roberts: Yeah. It jogs my memory a bit of little bit of The Demise of Ivan Ilych, which one other story of Tolstoy’s I like to recommend. And, the charm–it’s powerful–‘allure’ is just not fairly the proper word–the effectiveness of the story, I might say, comes from the disconnect between how the primary character sees himself and the way we, because the reader, are in a position to see him. The brilliance of Tolstoy is he would not say, ‘Take a look at this hypocrite.’ He would not say, ‘Take a look at this self-deceiving particular person.’ He simply slowly offers you his interior ideas, describes what he does, and we, because the reader, see the person extra absolutely than the person sees himself. It is fairly superb.

Russ Roberts: Earlier than shifting on to Hobbes and Adam Smith, I wish to say one factor concerning the story. I discussed the repetitive nature. So, the wind is all the time blowing. The snow is all the time piling up. They cannot see anyplace. They get misplaced quite a few occasions. The truth is, they begin off at one point–early within the story, they begin off they usually find yourself in a city. They leave–they undergo the city; and a few variety of hours later they’re again as a result of it is so snowy and blizzardy that they they’ve gotten misplaced. And, they cease there for some time and form of regain their wellbeing. They’ve some tea and alcohol they usually sit in entrance of a heat fireplace. They usually’re requested to remain, however they return out once more.

And, why do you suppose Tolstoy has that second–two journeys by way of this city? Why could not he simply, okay, they cease within the city. There’s some attention-grabbing issues that occur within the city, actually attention-grabbing issues. It is related to the story. We be taught much more once more concerning the character’s attitudes, each of them, Vasili and Nikita. However, why do you suppose Tolstoy has them get misplaced there twice? And, every time, by the way in which, every time he passes by way of city, no less than three of the occasions, he sees it is a horrible picture of frozen clothes on the road, drying. In fact, it isn’t drying: it is frozen and it is waving wildly, desperately within the wind.

And, George Saunders, in A Swim in a Pond within the Rain, says it is a sign. ‘Hey, it is unhealthy occasions right here, of us. Do not preserve going. Cease.’ And, they only ignore it. The truth is, the shirt is a white shirt, like give up, and it is form of a touch like ‘Give up,’ they usually refuse. They simply preserve going. As a result of, there’s cash to be made. And Vasili, he is afraid another competitor will get the grove that he is interested by taking from this man at a great value. Why do you suppose Tolstoy does that?

Russ Roberts: Yeah, exactly–

Russ Roberts: Yeah. The purpose I needed to make concerning the repetition or the recurrence of photographs and the passing by way of the city greater than as soon as. A set of disagreeable issues occur to them greater than as soon as. They go off the highway greater than as soon as, the horse will get misplaced greater than as soon as, the horse will get worn out greater than as soon as. They’re being pulled on a sledge by a horse. And, by the way in which, Tolstoy is basically into horses. He has lots to say about interacting with horses, taking good care of them. And, in some ways, the horses are the heroes of the story. They’re all the time put upon and also you sympathize with them.

However, these recurrences for me are Tolstoy is saying one thing concerning the nature of life. That for a few of us and at some stretches in our life, we simply make the identical errors over and over, as a result of we’re not paying consideration. Both we’re blinded by the draw, the pull of the deal or the cash that you simply point out, or we simply do not discover that we’re making these errors over and over. The irony of the story is that Nikita is the dirt-poor peasant. He has much more sense than Vasili out within the wild, within the pure world. Within the pure world, you actually wish to be with him and never with Vasili. You wish to be with Nikita. And, but in his personal world, the world of Vasili, he is a grasp. He is spectacularly expert.

And, I believe what Tolstoy is attempting to inform us is that there is quite a lot of issues in life besides–obviously moreover cash. However even the extra basic concept that there are different issues in life which are occurring and it is advisable to have an consciousness of a richer and fuller image of what is necessary, is pushed residence by these repetitive scenes. It is virtually comedian, if it weren’t tragic. It is the–they get loads of probabilities to redeem themselves, they usually just–they miss most of them. So, I discovered that very {powerful}.

Russ Roberts: Yeah, I suppose it isn’t that refined to level out that Vasili is misplaced in some ways, not simply bodily and that evening, however extra usually. I forgot concerning the 2300 rubles: it is a tremendous factor. It is within the first paragraph or so, possibly second paragraph. It says, ‘Oh, he had 2300 rubble from the church.’ That he is, like, the steward–he’s, like, the treasurer of the church–and he has 700 of his personal. And, Tolstoy would not even give it an apart. He simply states the details. He took 2300 rubles of the church cash, added 700 of his personal, so he had 3000 rubles. And, the value he is aspiring to pay is above that. It is clearly the down fee.

However, he by no means explains what he is pondering, I suppose, as a result of he would not should. We simply understand, ‘Oh, he’s a dishonest particular person, and he feels entitled to take the cash that is not his and use it for this function,’ although, and possibly, he intends to pay it again. We do not know. It is left completely unspoken. It is loopy.

Russ Roberts: A rogue–

Russ Roberts: Yeah. I simply wish to point out one different Tolstoy brief story, which I really like, known as “How A lot Land Does a Man Want?” This [“Master and Man”–Econlib Ed.] is an extended story. It is a very lengthy story. It is called–I believe you’d name it a novella. It is one thing like 50, 60 pages, that means, dozens of pages. I do not bear in mind precisely how lengthy it’s. However, “How A lot Land Does a Man Want?” is an identical story. It is about 5 pages, but it surely’s additionally superbly instructed. He has a capability to construct up stress and concern, simply with–effortless. It seems to be easy. I am positive it is a craft he labored very, very onerous at.

Russ Roberts: Properly, let’s flip to Hobbes and Smith. What would Thomas Hobbes take into consideration the character Vasili, the particular person, the person? Would he choose him? Tolstoy clearly needs us to see him as a failed human being–a man who’s misplaced, who’s touring in circles, who is just not paying consideration. And we’ll come again to paying consideration in a bit of bit. However, what would Hobbes consider him?

Russ Roberts: Properly, you possibly can argue–you don’t–but you may argue that Adam Smith feels the identical means. Adam Smith definitely is a powerful believer in self-interest. Definitely believes we tend to place ourselves first. His well-known instance, we have talked about many occasions on this system, of the one who hears concerning the lack of tens of millions of lives in China resulting from a pure disaster would possibly say one thing, ‘Oh, that is horrible.’ May give it some thought for a minute. May fear about the place his manufacturing unit is, if it is close to China and the earthquake. However he will sleep like a child. However, if you happen to inform him he will should have an operation tomorrow–he’s going to lose his little finger–he will not have the ability to sleep.

And, so, Smith clearly understood that, and I believe he is proper about each these two issues. I believe, he understood human beings very effectively. Is not that Hobbes’ view? I imply, is Smith any totally different?

Russ Roberts: So, I simply wish to make the exclamation level of this. I believe each Hobbes and Smith suppose that human beings are largely self-interested. However, what you are including is that that’s in battle, typically, with getting alongside in a world that is full of different individuals. And, we do not simply bang into individuals as billiard balls. We care about them. We love them. We’re generally afraid of them. We work with them in lots of collaborative methods to construct issues in business enterprises and nonprofits that attempt to assist different individuals.

The essence of life is that we’re a social animal–human beings–and economists have form of ignored that, roughly. Economists are all the time taking a look at, ‘What’s in it for me?’ That’s the economist’s view. What’s in it for me may embrace the satisfaction from serving to another person. However, what I believe is in Smith–and I believe any considerate one who is just not an economist–is that we additionally care about doing the proper factor generally even when it would not redound to our well-being straight.

You’ll be able to attempt to shove that again into the mannequin and say, ‘Oh, effectively, doing the proper factor is what offers you pleasure.’ And, I disagree with that. And, I argue as an alternative that quite a lot of occasions we do issues that are not enjoyable, do not give us pleasure. We want we may preserve the pockets we discover on the street and purchase one thing with the cash. However, we expect it is the unsuitable factor to do, so we give it again; and we’re probably not comfortable about it as a result of I needed the cash. However, a few of us give the cash again. Give the pockets, discover the proprietor and provides the pockets again. And, Tolstoy, I believe, how would Tolstoy match into that?

Russ Roberts: Properly, you might need. When you’ve got an iPhone and good Wi-Fi, you may be okay. However, that actually is the proper query when you concentrate on it. We have put ourselves into a bit of little bit of solitary confinement over the past decade or so with our give attention to our telephones.

Russ Roberts: However, I wish to attempt to problem your view, and my view as effectively. A footnote on the facet is that Tolstoy was a spiritual man. There’s a Divine component of this story. In a means, it’s extremely, very small. It is solely launched on possibly a few pages. In one other means, it is the entire story. So, it is an attention-grabbing fictional component of the story is the position that the Divine performs and the way it speaks to individuals and retains them centered on issues aside from themselves. However, I wish to put, I wish to put that to the facet.

I wish to problem my view. I wish to come again to what I requested you earlier than. So, he solely cares about himself, he solely cares about making a deal, why is that–? Hobbes says, in response to you in your essay, which we’ll additionally hyperlink to for listeners. Hobbes stated, ‘It is rational to take care of your self.’ He did not take into consideration evolution, however you possibly can argue it is evolutionarily match. Ayn Rand definitely careworn that; you talked about that in passing in your essay.

What’s unsuitable with that? I imply, so what? So, he sees himself as not related to different individuals. So, he places himself first. That is what everyone ought to do, the argument would possibly go. After which, by way of the invisible hand–that’s a misunderstanding of Smith, however I am attempting to be truthful to the opposite side–we’ll say it is Mandeville in The Fable of the Bees. Some individuals are attempting to earn money. They will construct companies, they usually’ll in truth, yeah, I am going to simply say it that means. So, why is that–what’s unsuitable with that?

Russ Roberts: However, the economist would possibly argue–and definitely, I do know many who do argue this way–‘You recognize, you are only a paternalist, Richard.’ This is this man, Vasili. He is comfortable as a clam. He is received some huge cash. True, his spouse is unloved. True, he sees his son as an object–the particular person who’s going to be his, the caretaker of his belongings when he dies. However, he is comfortable. Thinks quite a lot of himself. You are suggesting you already know higher about what’s good for him.

And, definitely, Tolstoy is doing that. He is comfortable to do it. However, wasn’t Hobbes onto one thing? Wasn’t–what’s the large deal? So, you suppose he is lacking out. He would not. He is received these decisions. He is chosen to disregard them and to benefit from what floats his boat. And, what floats his boat is daydreaming about how a lot cash he is received. Within the trendy world, he’d be trying over his inventory holdings within the Wall Avenue Journal day-after-day, and he’d be counting his cash. You recognize–big deal.