Skip to main contentSkip to solution

I've been following the economic crisis for more than two years now. I began working on the subject as part of the background to a novel, and soon realized that I had stumbled across the most interesting story I've ever found. While I was beginning to work on it, the British bank Northern Rock blew up, and it became clear that, as I wrote at the time, "If our laws are not extended to control the new kinds of super-powerful, super-complex, and potentially super- risky investment vehicles, they will one day cause a financial disaster of global-systemic proportions." I was both right and too late, because all the groundwork for the crisis had already been done though the sluggishness of the world's governments, in not preparing for the great unraveling of autumn 2008, was then and still is stupefying. But this is the first reason why I wrote this book: because what's happened is extraordinarily interesting. It is an absolutely amazing story, full of human interest and drama, one whose byways of mathematics, economics, and psychology are both central to the story of the last decades and mysteriously unknown to the general public. We have heard a lot about "the two cultures" of science and the arts we heard a particularly large amount

about it in 2009, because it was the fiftieth anniversary of the speech during which C. P. Snow first used the phrase. But I'm not sure the idea of a huge gap between science and the arts is as true as it was half a century ago it's certainly true, for instance, that a general reader who wants to pick up an education in the fundamentals of science will find it easier than ever before. It seems to me that there is a much bigger gap between the world of finance and that of the general public and that there is a need to narrow that gap, if the financial industry is not to be a kind of priesthood, administering to its own mysteries and feared and resented by the rest of us. Many bright, literate people have no idea about all sorts of economic basics, of a type that financial insiders take as elementary facts of how the world works. I am an outsider to finance and economics, and my hope is that I can talk across that gulf.

My need to understand is the same as yours, whoever you are. That's one of the strangest ironies of this story: after decades in which the ideology of the Western world was personally and economically individualistic, we've suddenly been hit by a crisis which shows in the starkest terms that whether we like it or not and there are large parts of it that you would have to be crazy to like we're all in this together. The aftermath of the crisis is going to dominate the economics and politics of our societies for at least a decade to come and perhaps longer.

According to the passage, the author is likely to be supportive of which one of the following programmes?

Solution

āœ… Correct Option: 3

From passage: "It seems to me that there is a much bigger gap between the world of finance and that of the general public and that there is a need to narrow that gap, if the financial industry is not to be a kind of priesthood, administering to its own mysteries and feared and resented by the rest of us."

Author's concern -> finance world is like a priesthood (exclusive club) -> general public doesn't understand basic economics -> this gap needs to be narrowed

From passage: "Many bright, literate people have no idea about all sorts of economic basics, of a type that financial insiders take as elementary facts of how the world works."

Author's solution -> educate the masses about finance basics -> make finance knowledge accessible to everyone -> bridge the gap


šŸ”“ Option 1 -> scope-error -> focuses on creating researchers, not educating masses. Author wants to teach general public, not create more experts.

šŸ”“ Option 2 -> irrelevant -> about policy-making, not education. Author's concern is knowledge gap, not market policies.

🟢 Option 3 -> correct -> perfectly matches author's goal. "Financial literacy in masses" = narrowing the gap between finance world and general public.

šŸ”“ Option 4 -> extreme/irrelevant -> nationalizing banks isn't mentioned anywhere. Author talks about education, not changing ownership.

Key insight: Author sees the problem as ignorance, not bad institutions. His solution is education, not restructuring.

Keyboard Shortcuts

  • Left arrow: Previous question
  • Right arrow: Next question
  • S key: Jump to solution
  • Q key: Jump to question