One Star!

In search of readers who hated my book

Having collated the reviews of people who loved my book How Economics Can Save the World, I figured I should look into those who hated it. Who are they, and what was it about the book that they so despised? The question turned out to be much harder to answer.

Now that the book has been out about a year, Amazon has one 1-star rating. The modal and median responses are 5 stars, and the average 4.2. Unfortunately the unhappiest reader didn’t leave a review, so I can’t tell what they were thinking.

GoodReads has more active reviewers. Or else they’re just more opinionated. With 106 ratings total the modal response is four, and the average 3.7. Three readers gave the book one star. Luckily, for present purposes, one of them took the time to leave a written review.

The reader, Michael, begins: “I disagree with the author, I don't like this book, I think it is wrong.” Fair enough! Michael continues:

He seems to be saying that economics is everything, and economics doesn't say anything. If so, then how can it help? […]

Angner says that utility is a personal thing, and what is good for me may not be good for you, economics doesn't care. So where are we then? And how is economics any use in that case?

By defining economics so broadly, so that every possible thought can be an economic thought, it becomes value-free and cannot be right or wrong. Well, I disagree. Economics is about the best use of money and not wasting money, isn't it? Or by proxy the best use of a scarce resource?

I can’t help but notice that the review is mostly questions. In spite of his claim that he disagrees, Michael strikes me as a reader who’s still wondering what the book is about and what it’s trying to say. This is on me! I obviously need to work harder to make my writing clear and accessible to readers who are willing to make the effort but who for whatever reason find the material opaque.

(Just to be clear, I certainly don’t write that economics doesn’t say anything, and I explicitly reject the idea of economics as value free. But never mind.)

Meanwhile, Twitter/X user DivaJain2 did not think my book should have been named among “The 10 books of 2023 you cannot miss” by Mint. She writes: “Only book worth reading in the Top 5 is Pulak Prasad's … Angner is Narcissist Economist Master of the Universe and less said about Rajan & Co the better.”

I guess this reader found the book marked by excessive vanity, self-love, or self-admiration. I was disappointed to hear it, not the least because the book has a whole chapter about the virtue of epistemic humility and my own efforts to achieve it.

Epistemic humility a tricky topic to write about. If you’re too assertive about it, you make yourself vulnerable to charges of hypocrisy. But you can’t be too wishy-washy either, in my experience, or else the reader might not know what to think. I did put a lot of effort into striking the right balance between these things. I also go out of my way to explain why being humble is not the same as being meek, and why being assertive is sometimes consistent with humility. But I’ll try to improve.

My kids, for better or worse, won’t let me forget it. They’ve started calling me “Narcissist Economist Master of the Universe” around the house.

Anyway, these are the five people I’ve managed to track down who hated my book. I guess they taught me a few things.

Other than that, I’m glad to report, reviews have been overwhelmingly positive, and the critiques relevant, accurate, measured, and fair. No complaints!