An interview in The Atlantic with Lawrence Krauss about his book a [amazon_link id=”145162445X” target=”_blank” ]Universe from Nothin[/amazon_link]g has been causing a bit of a stir because Krauss is rather provocatively insulting about philosophers: “Philosophy is a field that, unfortunately, reminds me of that old Woody Allen joke, “those that can’t do, teach, and those that can’t teach, teach gym.” And the worst part of philosophy is the philosophy of science; the only people, as far as I can tell, that read work by philosophers of science are other philosophers of science.” He goes on to say that philosophy hasn’t advanced in millennia.

Talk about the two cultures.

As I say, I’ve not read it, but have just finished Michael Sandel’s new book, [amazon_link id=”1846144728″ target=”_blank” ]What Money Can’t Buy| The Moral Limits of Markets[/amazon_link]. I’m reviewing for The Independent so will hold off saying much here. However, it opposes moral philosophy and economics, or at least markets; and it did remind me strongly of a number of earlier anti-market books from Ruskin’s [amazon_link id=”1599868059″ target=”_blank” ]Unto This Last[/amazon_link] to Karl Polanyi’s [amazon_link id=”080705643X” target=”_blank” ]The Great Transformation[/amazon_link]. Sandel’s book is brilliant. Recent history has given him terrific material. Yet the arguments from philosophy are familiar.

Writing about the fuss his [amazon_link id=”1107606144″ target=”_blank” ]Two Cultures[/amazon_link] lecture had generated, C.P.Snow said economics and other quantitative social science in fact formed a third culture, bridging the sciences and humanities. He grew allergic to the number two. Hmm. Actually, I think the dualism might apply here.

[amazon_image id=”184614471X” link=”true” target=”_blank” size=”medium” ]What Money Can’t Buy: The Moral Limits of Markets[/amazon_image]