All of mlinksva's Comments + Replies

Think wider about the root causes of progress

Fine article overall, but starting from what srikes me as a strawperson argument does not appeal to me:

Too much discussion of the Industrial Revolution is myopic, focused narrowly on a few highlights such as steam and coal.

I'm a very casual reader in this area but this strikes me as at best very outdated. To not get laughed at in coversation, or to be read even for popular audiences, one for a long time has had to acknowledge that the causes and dates of the IR are uncertain and many, and posit something complex and overlooked, certainly not steam and coal... (read more)

1jasoncrawford2yI think the main statement of Allen's argument is his book The British Industrial Revolution in Global Perspective [https://www.amazon.com/Industrial-Revolution-Perspective-Approaches-Economic-ebook/dp/B00FF76RPK] . Here's a summary article he wrote: “Why was the Industrial Revolution British? [https://cepr.org/voxeu/columns/why-was-industrial-revolution-british]” You could also check out Scott Alexander's review [https://astralcodexten.substack.com/p/book-review-global-economic-history] of his book Global Economic History: A Very Short Introduction. In the first book mentioned above, Allen states: “I do not ignore supply-side developments like the growth of scientific knowledge or the spread of scientific culture. However, I emphasize other factors increasing the supply of technology that have not received their due…” But when his argument gets condensed, the factors other than the ones he focuses on (high wages and cheap energy) tend to get dropped. As to your first point, I didn't say “all discussion”, just “too much”…