Thursday , January 23 2020
Home / EconLog Library / #EconlibReads continues

#EconlibReads continues

Summary:
One of the things we most enjoy about this ever-growing Econlib community of learners is our shared love of reading and conversation. We’re grateful to the many of you who have been joining us online these last several months for our #EconlibReads discussions. Earlier today, we published a PDF of the questions from last month’s discussion on Josef Pieper’s Leisure: The Basis of Culture, a suggestion we took from EconTalk fav Ryan Holiday. Here’s a sample of some: On page 31, Pieper writes, “no one who looks to leisure simply to restore hisworking powers will ever discover the fruit of leisure.” What does this mean?Have you ever achieved a state of leisure? How did you do it? Are philosophy and the ‘self-sufficient world of work” really as incommensurate asPieper

Topics:
Amy Willis considers the following as important: , , , , , ,

This could be interesting, too:

Sarah Skwire writes Count Dracula and the Chamber of Wonders

Steven Horwitz writes Robinson Crusoe: Not Exactly Isolated

Russ Roberts writes Gratitude, Kindness, Loveliness

Amy Willis writes Econlib Virtual Reading Group: McCloskey’s Why Liberalism Works

One of the things we most enjoy about this ever-growing Econlib community of learners is our shared love of reading and conversation. We’re grateful to the many of you who have been joining us online these last several months for our #EconlibReads discussions.

Earlier today, we published a PDF of the questions from last month’s discussion on Josef Pieper’s Leisure: The Basis of Culture, a suggestion we took from EconTalk fav Ryan Holiday. Here’s a sample of some:

On page 31, Pieper writes, “no one who looks to leisure simply to restore his
working powers will ever discover the fruit of leisure.” What does this mean?
Have you ever achieved a state of leisure? How did you do it?

Are philosophy and the ‘self-sufficient world of work” really as incommensurate as
Pieper argues (p. 74) Put another way, can a businessman never engage in
philosophizing?

.How is philosophy an ‘attitude of mind’ (p. 78)? By this definition, what other
discipline(s) can make the same claim? To what extent can economics make it?

What is the “bourgeois mind” to Pieper (p. 102), and what’s wrong with it? Must
the poet and the philosopher (among others perhaps) be UNbourgeois?

This month, we’re reading David Epstein’s Range: Why Generalists Triumph in a Specialized World. This was also one of the most popular EconTalk episodes this year. We hope you’ll join our conversation in our Facebook group and/or on twitter. We love to hear from you!

#EconlibReads continues


As an Amazon Associate, Econlib earns from qualifying purchases.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *