Moykr/McCloskey's makes the most sense as the spark that launched the fire (I lean more to Moykr but McCloskey does have some decent points). But I do think we need to also look at the Gregory Clark hypothesis as laying the groundwork that would enable the eventual fire to catch. Clark's hypothesis around cultural (and yes, *gack*, biolo…
Moykr/McCloskey's makes the most sense as the spark that launched the fire (I lean more to Moykr but McCloskey does have some decent points). But I do think we need to also look at the Gregory Clark hypothesis as laying the groundwork that would enable the eventual fire to catch. Clark's hypothesis around cultural (and yes, *gack*, biological) evolution in certain polities/areas creating the population preconditions for the eventual growth.
(McCloskey's dismissal of it in the book was embarrassing for McCloskey, betraying a basic misunderstanding of evolutionary facts and thinking 'reversion to the mean' somehow ruled it out. Greg Cochran called out this mistake rather sharply in a blogpost https://westhunt.wordpress.com/2016/05/16/economists-and-biology/ )
Clark's theory helps explain for instance why Germany, Northwest Europe, Japan and other East Asian countries later were able to also adopt the industrial revolution far more easily and achieve high growh rates while say, Sub-Saharan Africa, Middle East, Latin America struggled and continue to struggle far more. It's not the entirety, but it explains a lot and makes the world much easier to understand than in the absence of it.
Moykr/McCloskey's makes the most sense as the spark that launched the fire (I lean more to Moykr but McCloskey does have some decent points). But I do think we need to also look at the Gregory Clark hypothesis as laying the groundwork that would enable the eventual fire to catch. Clark's hypothesis around cultural (and yes, *gack*, biological) evolution in certain polities/areas creating the population preconditions for the eventual growth.
(McCloskey's dismissal of it in the book was embarrassing for McCloskey, betraying a basic misunderstanding of evolutionary facts and thinking 'reversion to the mean' somehow ruled it out. Greg Cochran called out this mistake rather sharply in a blogpost https://westhunt.wordpress.com/2016/05/16/economists-and-biology/ )
Clark's theory helps explain for instance why Germany, Northwest Europe, Japan and other East Asian countries later were able to also adopt the industrial revolution far more easily and achieve high growh rates while say, Sub-Saharan Africa, Middle East, Latin America struggled and continue to struggle far more. It's not the entirety, but it explains a lot and makes the world much easier to understand than in the absence of it.