Thursday, October 12, 2006

Postmodern Economics as revealed to Clovis



British blogpal Canker sent me this hilarious piece he wrote on a proposed exam for `postmodern economics.'

Here's a sample:

"Candidates should answer question 1 and three others unless they don’t feel like it. Marks will be awarded for a consistent attempt to see beneath the superficial text of the questions to the underlying anomie of the examiner and for gratuitous insult. The use of the word ‘auteur’ is encouraged, as are long and, at first sight, incomprehensible, sentences which on a second or third reading are seen to be tautologies. Remember that punctuation, correctly omitted, is an aid to obscurity and that clarity is the last refuge of the scoundrel


1. From a critical reading of this exam, deduce the examiner’s age, gender and sexual orientation. Give a thumbnail sketch of their life to date and indicate how you expect it to end.

{..}

The so-called environmentalist and presidential hopeful, Al Gore-Tex, has recently suggested that ‘If all the effort put into weapons development were devoted instead to the development and production of useful goods we’d all be a lot happier.’ Draft a suavely threatening reply from a bluff but sinister leader of the US military-industrial complex. Be sure to mention campaign donations.

{..}

Why does the Wealth of Nations contain no discussion of the economics of prostitution? Who was Adam Smith trying to fool?

{...}

Why do the World Bank and the IMF consistently underfund conspiracy theorists?"


Read the rest of Postmodern Economics here..

1 comment:

nazar said...

There was actually a study released that showed that the more complex words you use, the stupider you look to the reader. The title of the article, you ask?

"Consequences of erudite vernacular utilized irrespective of necessity."