Aestu wrote:
To have an impact on the world.
Most of these "advisory councils" and "successful economists" do not change the world, they merely comment on it. Look at it this way: if so-and-such person did not exist, what would change? Does the void need filling?
Would not the world be a more stable place if these academics actually were able to construct viable and functionally effective models of how the world works?
You can take the school of knowledge of chemistry or physics or whatnot and make functionally effective innovations with them. If economists were able to do the same, the world would be a wealthier and more equitable place. It is not; our economic fate is controlled by the power balance in business and politics, not by what the economic theory says. Things like the S&L crisis, the dotcom boom, hedge funds, international diplomacy - that is what moves the world forward, and it's driven by those who do, not those who sit around and comment on it after the fact.
Earlier in this thread I gave the example of my professor at college who in fact often gives interviews about political matters and is very proud of his academic success. His most recent interview is on the front page of our campus site. That doesn't change the fact that he does not "do", he merely comments, and most of what he says is superficial and provably wrong. He could say he is successful; I would say he is superficial. If he did not exist nothing would change.
By contrast, I gave the example of that guy who owned a pawn shop. Perhaps someone else would satisfy the demand for a pawn shop if he did not build one, but that doesn't change the fact that he took nothing and made it into something. What he has, is of his own making, as opposed to someone who might simply manage someone else's franchise. To manage something someone else created is infinitely less significant than to create something for oneself even if the latter is quantitatively smaller - because in one case and not the other, the world has changed as a result.
Thegodslayer, considering that 6.3B people on this planet are the product of other people having children and the overwhelming majority will likely have children in turn, if having children had any bearing on worth as an individual, we would live in an incomparably better world than we do.
I would object to your definition for two reasons. First, even if we agree that "having an impact on the world" is what it takes to be successful, you have defined success in that field in an incredibly narrow manner (and are begging the question when you ask Callysta how she's successful, since you seem to have already concluded that neither economists nor mothers can be successful by definition). Economists and other academics do have an impact on the real world (although not as great as they would like, of course). The US stimulus package, which was an enormous outlay of money, was implemented based on advice from economists, and governments routinely design tax schemes and implement monetary policy based on economic theory. Effective city planning is based on work by academics on traffic flows, networking theories, crowd psychology, etc. Fishing quotas, which determine the course of a fisherman's livelihood, are based on science-based population and ecological models. I could go on indefinitely, but suffice it to say that you have a very shallow understanding of what academics actually do. Some, or even much, of the advice these people offer may be flawed, but they still have real impacts. I fail to see how the work of these people who "merely comment" is less important in the world than the guy who owns a pawn shop down the street.
Second, your definition of success is not shared by everyone, and I suspect not even by a majority of people. Nobody deliberately sets out to be unsuccessful, but yet people routinely pursue life paths that will never reach the level of impact you think is required for success. Some people value making lots of money or building a successful business, others look for rewarding and interesting careers, others want to provide a comfortable life for their families or raise well-adjusted, happy children. People can be successful at any of these goals without having what you would call a major impact on the world; if they succeed at their aims in life, then they are successful, regardless of your assessment of the worth of those goals.