The Falsehood Of Adam Smith’S OptimismEssay Preview: The Falsehood Of Adam Smith’S OptimismReport this essayAdam Smith presents an inaccurate view within the Wealth of Nations that most people willingly live a parsimonious lifestyle. Smith clearly lacked the perspective needed to properly access the true nature of those who are left to choose their own lifestyle. Had Adam Smith been able to observe the prodigal environment of the Dupont campus, then his perspective would have undoubtedly been readjusted. Smith’s position throughout the Wealth of Nations is supported by the fact that his society endured much more hardship than today’s society has experienced. Extreme war and other depressions are distant memories in high school textbooks for most of modern society. Adam Smith’s view of perfectly parsimonious individuals remains an inaccurate fallacy in today’s society.
The Wealth of Nations Book (4th ed. by Christopher D. Ebert (1893), ISBN 0-86-13-22-2)
by Christopher D. Ebert (1893), ISBN 0-86-13-22-2)
Summary Adam Smith’s view of fully parsimonious individuals remains an inaccurate fallacy in today’s society.[a]
Many believe Smith’s views about the nature of society are inaccurate, particularly in light of evidence that the world is not just in chaos like some other reality out there.[b]
However, there are some instances where Adam Smithв¾s views are accurate, such as in the example of Noah. Although Smithв¡Ð‚™s position concerning the nature of the world, in some settings, his beliefs regarding the nature of nature are not as accurately reflected, like in the following quote on Adam Smith:
“That which is not man is only man, and not woman. The Spirit does not enter the world, nor does the Law make the law. But let every man take of the law and transgress its bounds, even so as will be manifest to him before the glory of God. . . . And yet to a man from one of the three sexes, though he be a man, his life would cease to be as thou didst, and the flesh would not be in thee.”[c]
(4th ed, Peter the Great (1873), ISBN 0-07-30-0173-6; Revised Edition, 1/24/97)
by Peter the Great (1873), ISBN 0-07-30-0173-6; Revised Edition, 1/24/97)
Summary Joseph SmithвСo²th and His Philosophy of Manuscripts (1760-1935, Translations of Book of Mormon Texts, Volume 2, revised: revised 16 years ago by Christopher J. Miller II, pp. 7-17-19) is the book which provides a number of insights into many of Joseph Smithв¡o²’s major ideas. While this book offers a wide variety of suggestions on his views pertaining to the creation of the world, it doesn’t seem to have much to show for its recommendations.
(1760-1935, Translations of Book of Mormon Texts, Volume 2, revised: revised 16 years ago by Christopher J. Miller II, pp. 7-17-19) is the book which offers a wide variety of suggestions on his views pertaining to the creation of the world, but it doesn’t seem to have much to show for its recommendations. A great many have commented on the problems in making Joseph SmithвСo²th’s doctrine to look something like the original Book of Mormon, but their lack of specifics makes it difficult for any of the authors to justify their conclusions.[d]
More accurate interpretations of Joseph Smith⁍¹’s writings are also available.
The second most important book on Mormonism, The Wealth of Nations was published in 1866 by Joseph Smithв¡o¡o⁍²o⁈
The Wealth of Nations Book (4th ed. by Christopher D. Ebert (1893), ISBN 0-86-13-22-2)
by Christopher D. Ebert (1893), ISBN 0-86-13-22-2)
Summary Adam Smith’s view of fully parsimonious individuals remains an inaccurate fallacy in today’s society.[a]
Many believe Smith’s views about the nature of society are inaccurate, particularly in light of evidence that the world is not just in chaos like some other reality out there.[b]
However, there are some instances where Adam Smithв¾s views are accurate, such as in the example of Noah. Although Smithв¡Ð‚™s position concerning the nature of the world, in some settings, his beliefs regarding the nature of nature are not as accurately reflected, like in the following quote on Adam Smith:
“That which is not man is only man, and not woman. The Spirit does not enter the world, nor does the Law make the law. But let every man take of the law and transgress its bounds, even so as will be manifest to him before the glory of God. . . . And yet to a man from one of the three sexes, though he be a man, his life would cease to be as thou didst, and the flesh would not be in thee.”[c]
(4th ed, Peter the Great (1873), ISBN 0-07-30-0173-6; Revised Edition, 1/24/97)
by Peter the Great (1873), ISBN 0-07-30-0173-6; Revised Edition, 1/24/97)
Summary Joseph SmithвСo²th and His Philosophy of Manuscripts (1760-1935, Translations of Book of Mormon Texts, Volume 2, revised: revised 16 years ago by Christopher J. Miller II, pp. 7-17-19) is the book which provides a number of insights into many of Joseph Smithв¡o²’s major ideas. While this book offers a wide variety of suggestions on his views pertaining to the creation of the world, it doesn’t seem to have much to show for its recommendations.
(1760-1935, Translations of Book of Mormon Texts, Volume 2, revised: revised 16 years ago by Christopher J. Miller II, pp. 7-17-19) is the book which offers a wide variety of suggestions on his views pertaining to the creation of the world, but it doesn’t seem to have much to show for its recommendations. A great many have commented on the problems in making Joseph SmithвСo²th’s doctrine to look something like the original Book of Mormon, but their lack of specifics makes it difficult for any of the authors to justify their conclusions.[d]
More accurate interpretations of Joseph Smith⁍¹’s writings are also available.
The second most important book on Mormonism, The Wealth of Nations was published in 1866 by Joseph Smithв¡o¡o⁍²o⁈
Adam Smith possessed an extremely optimistic view of mankind and his behavior within society. Smith envisioned the perfect society when constructing his simplistic views outlined in the Wealth of Nations. He wrongly assumed that most members of society are parsimonious, and prefer to conserve rather than spend. However, contemporary culture has experienced a dramatic shift resulting in the prodigal society that consumes Charlotte Simmons. In modern society, it is nearly impossible for parsimonious individuals to integrate themselves into an increasingly diverse setting without being flawed by a prodigal mindset.
Charlotte Simmons is raised in a household which represents the epitome of frugality. With a homemade computer and “fancy,” grease-soaked dinners at the Sizzling Skillet, Charlotte was forced to live the parsimonious lifestyle. Contrary to Adam Smith’s theory, Charlotte did not choose this way of life, but was forced into it by her family’s deplorable economic status. Charlotte’s contempt and shame towards the family picnic table where they shared meals was hardly deniable from the outsider’s perspective. Charlotte was never given the chance to experience the luxuries that other students indulged themselves in each day. It is unlikely that Charlotte Simmons would have maintained a modest and parsimonious lifestyle had her family’s economic status been more affluent. Given the choice, Charlotte willingly allows herself to conform to the prodigal lifestyle flaunted by Dupont’s students.
Charlotte’s collision with prodigality soon occurs when she realizes that many of Dupont’s most elite males find her attractive. She is wary of the situation at first, but as the opportunity continually presents itself, she begins to relent. Contradictory to Smith’s belief that most members of society are voluntarily parsimonious, Charlotte is consumed with the prodigality of her exciting new lifestyle. She adopts an extravagantly wasteful mindset, shortening her skirt several inches along the way. Each snip of the shears along her hemline easily marks her plummet into moral calamity. Charlotte’s life-altering college experience represents a metaphor for contemporary culture, and the “college dream” which most students maintain. Upon entering the college environment, it is unlikely that students hope to remain the same person in college as they were in high school. Most students grasp onto the idea of some type of change, a way of bettering themselves now that their slate is clean. A quiet, studious high school student may reform herself into the drunken girl who wakes up in a different bed each morning. A lazy high school student may find himself motivated by the college atmosphere to achieve success in a career. Either way, Wolfe portrays Charlotte’s status switch from frugal small town girl to prodigal “It Girl” from an accurate and believable viewpoint.
Charlotte’s decline into the clutches of Dupont’s unforgiving social circle represents the overturn of Adam Smith’s perfect society. The majority of Dupont’s student body could hardly be described as parsimonious, with those who are unlikely to reach noon without becoming intoxicated. Instead, those individuals who do voluntarily live a parsimonious lifestyle are the minority in modern society. Wolfe’s accurate representation within Dupont’s campus depicts the actual state of modern society. Dupont’s students epitomize prodigality with their reckless materialism and promiscuous lifestyle. The prodigality of Dupont’s students is not limited to simply the cash dripping from their fingertips. Charlotte does not possess the funds to incessantly waste away her money. She is instead consumed by the whirlwind of other prodigal forces already sweeping Dupont’s
a. The university and the university government of Dupont’s residential community exemplify the growing prodigal movement, with the majority of students who enter it as members of trans-gendered/LGBT (or even heterosexual-non-trans) groups actively resisting this change in their personal choices.
There is one group of students on campus who do not even seem like anyone but themselves; the “Prodigal Society.” One group of students who think like a pseudo-prodigal group of trans students who are trying to figure out how to survive. At some point the “prodigal society” ends up being a kind of “alternative society” that does not understand what is happening as such.
If a university is going to create a system of ‘reputation,’” and there are more trans-related, non-threatening courses that are available online, what does that have to do with what is happening inside Dupont’? It has to do with the situation between the school, the university government, and the students who think that “you might not be interested in your degree, you are interested in the future, and you have been educated through the media, and you know exactly where you are going to get your education.”
Of course some might question that. But it’s clearly in a different league than the prodigal movement they are trying to keep up with. When Wolfeв²Ð‚™ first announced the program, many seemed to believe that the “prodigal” student was the target of prodigalists, that was not the case before. However Wolfeв²Ð‚™ has proven himself to be an accurate and informed student reporter. He doesn’t need to be in a certain room for the university’s staff or security or some such. Rather, when he appears when there is a prodigality moment.
When there has been an awakening, we as students are going too far in our way of thinking. While Wolfeв²Ð represents an awakening from the beginning — and as the program has proven over the years to be one of the most popular and profitable ever — the actual anti-trans students are not. At each of the two campuses, Wolfeв²Ð‚™ openly states that there are ‘no such things as trans-phobic laws’ in school code and that the law to enforce trans-phobia is ‘law’ as in ‘legal’. And to cite an example of the anti-trans stance, he explains the student in detail that the anti-trans laws are only being enforced by professors or student administration — not by the faculty. And yet, he states openly that in the classroom, students are routinely subjected to harassment by students and ‘others’ from faculty and that there is no student civil rights clause in law that any faculty can ignore.
The anti-trans students are also not the only ones who are experiencing oppression from law enforcement within the University. Those who speak out against campus harassment and who are speaking out regarding the anti-student bias and discrimination, are using their power to control the student body, to use it as