Homo economicus is the term used by economists to describe the ideal, economical human. Homo economicus differs from the regular homo sapiens in his remarkable ability to weigh profit and loss and act in a way that maximizes his net gain, in all actions. Of course, homo sapiens are limited by their emotions, which is what makes us individuals and not cold-hearted machines, but the idea of an "economic man" is still interesting. More importantly, it connects economy to philosophy in a way that forces one to introspect: am I really being economical and rational when I make decisions?

I have always been interested in philosophy, to the point where I founded a philosophy club at my high school. But it wasn’t until only a few months that I discovered philosophy’s intrinsic connection to economics, for both fields are basically studies of how and why people do what they do, be it serving the community or investing in capital. With my interest piqued, I began to read several economical books, from flipping through the basic For Dummies series to struggling through Capital in the 21st Century. It wasn’t until I got to Freakonomics, however, that I started considering economics as a significant field of study.

In Freakonomics, Steven Levitt, an acclaimed economist, and Stephen Dubner, a journalist, connect economics to unconventional topics, including the KKK and sumo wrestling. Although not the most scholastic source, Freakonomics did something far greater than just listing off empirical data; it encouraged me to perceive philosophical and economical concepts in the world around me and become more economical myself.

Over the past few months, I’ve begun to notice some of the quirks and idiosyncrasies held by the individuals that form my community. For example, I have become distinctly aware of a notorious phenomenon known as IST, or Indian standard time. I’m not talking about the fact that it is 5:42 AM in Mumbai as I’m writing this sentence. I’m talking about how some Indian people, generally those who immigrated from India in the 70s, have issues with timeliness. For example, if my aunt or one of my mother’s friends is supposed to visit my home at 6:30 in the evening, I shouldn’t be surprised if the doorbell rings at 7:30 instead. Of course, this is generally a harmless issue, and possibly not an entirely prevalent one, but what if it has ramifications greater than just being late to a dinner party?

Consider the fact that almost 10% of doctors in America are also of Indian origin1. Indian immigrants, as with minorities in general, tend to seek out their own ethnicity when moving into a community, be it a classroom or a city. This explains the existence of communities such as Chinatown in New York, or India Square in New Jersey. Thus, as the first-generation children of Indian immigrants matriculate through medical school and join the large community of Indian doctors, Indian patients would gravitate towards them as caregivers. What if, due to IST, Indian patients are always late, and thus doctors are always backlogged? This is all hypothetical, of course, but imagine the drain in efficiency that would occur in such a situation. How could we solve this problem?

It is these types of questions and connections that interest, for they are practical yet also knee-deep in philosophy and the study of human nature. With this interest, I plan on pursuing economics as my chosen major, and on imbibing the valuable knowledge economics can provide into my own life. I may not be able to evolve into homo economicus, but I can at least become more efficient and productive as I pursue my personal goals. And to think, it all started with a book that has “freak” in the title.