[Reading] The Philosophy of Policy Part 1

Publication Information

• Title: The Philosophy of Policy

• Author: Takeshi Nakano

• Publisher: Shueisha

• Release Date: 2025/1/24

• Hardcover: 352 pages

This article is Part 1 of a series of introductory articles on "The Philosophy of Policy".

• [Reading] The Philosophy of Policy Part 1: Mainstream Economics is Not a Science

• [Reading] The Philosophy of Policy Part 2: Roy Bhaskar's Philosophy of Science

• [Reading] The Philosophy of Policy Part 3: What is the State, What is Policy

• [Reading] The Philosophy of Policy Part 4: Incorporating Polanyi's Philosophy of Science

• [Reading] The Philosophy of Policy Part 5: The World of Complex Systems

• [Reading] The Philosophy of Policy Part 6: What is Politics

The sense of deadlock also felt by bureaucrats

The author, Takeshi Nakano, is an active official at the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry and a critic.
He is originally a prolific writer, but between last year and this year, he has written two books that are likely important to him as well. One is "Introduction to Schumpeter", and the other is this book, "Philosophy of Policy". I have already written an introductory article regarding "Introduction to Schumpeter".

And this book is also a bestseller that is still in the top 10 in the fields of political science and economics on Amazon (as of May 16, 2025).

For a brilliant bureaucrat like Nakano, he must have always had things he wanted to say about the way state management is handled, where mainstream economics has taken over, and while advocating fiscal conservatism, things like rule-based policy or evidence-based policy, and the way state management is handled where advisory committees that are neither politicians nor bureaucrats have great authority (you know, that thing where the Minister of Health, Labour and Welfare is always saying "the council says..." regarding the 567-shot💉 damage).

Huh? I've gradually come to understand through demonstrations to dismantle the Ministry of Finance that fiscal conservatism is strange, but is rule-based policy bad? Is evidence-based policy bad too?

If that's the case, the "current" reality is becoming invisible. The rules that were decided and the evidence are also things of the past. Instead, while grasping the current reality, policy makers should devise policies at their own discretion in a way that responds to that reality. That is by no means self-righteous.

So, if there is something that is not a "pseudo-scientific dogma". If that is useful for policy.
Nakano says that it is essential to introduce "scientific evaluation" to measure the effectiveness of policies.

Nakano adopts Roy Bhaskar's philosophy of science and carefully examines the conditions under which social science can also be truly treated as a science (transcendental realism, critical realism) (Chapter 2, Chapter 3). By doing so,

In other words, instead of looking at society through colored glasses like "it should be this way" or "it ought to be this way," by looking at things as they are—that is, reality—policy makers can apply policies little by little even in situations they are seeing for the first time, and if they feel a positive response, they can apply them more broadly, and if it is negative, they can refrain, and by doing so, they are saying that they "will be able to better understand the structures and mechanisms of society and further enhance their policy execution capabilities."
Well, as a common person, I don't really want them to do anything that looks like an experiment, but society and the state do not, after all, have a physical reality, but are structures and mechanisms that people are creating right now, and

Other than gradually implementing policies based on such reality, what other ways are there? At present, reality = things as they are are not even being looked at, and policies that seem to have fallen from the heavens are being implemented continuously, which has only led to 30 years of exhaustion...
...it is as if they are saying that.

Or the mysterious mass deaths of Japanese people.
The Minister of Health, Labour and Welfare and the bureaucrats of the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare continue to ignore this fact without even trying to face it as it is. There must be a structure or mechanism within Japanese society that is causing this mysterious mass death.
The Minister of Health, Labour and Welfare keeps looking away, the bureaucrats of the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare keep looking away, and what should originallybe done by the PMDA (Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency)is being investigated by various private individuals and organizations, starting with Mr. Narimitsu Fujie.
And the current situation where effective drugs like Ivermectin are not approved.
What is going on??
I think this book could provide a theoretical backbone for such activities (well, it has nothing to do with medicine, and it is quite abstract).

Of course, this book is a philosophy book about excellent public policy, but at the same time, can't you hear the laments or grievances of excellent bureaucrats who are tied down by various things that cannot even be called science, such as pseudoscience, rules, and council decisions, and are only allowed to do boring work? (Or is it just my bad hearing...💦)

Excellent bureaucrats do not get up for free even if they fall.

So, what is science? What is a nation? This book seems to have depicted what can be depicted now.
The very fact that there is a bureaucrat inside who writes such a book seems to be one piece of evidence that Japan is a good country where freedom of speech is guaranteed (although problems are piling up).

From here on, I will inform you about the structure of this book, a summary introduction of the first chapter, and the schedule for future articles.

This book is by no means an easy book to read, but it is not so difficult that it is impossible to read.
I would especially like young people aiming to become bureaucrats and those interested in social science to read it (...this is just an old person's meddling...💦).
This article is not that long, but for those who do not like spoilers, I will post the table of contents, so please jump to the place you want. Thank you.

Structure of this book

This book is basically indebted to the insights of a researcher of philosophy of science (including those related to social science) named Roy Bhaskar, who passed away in 2014. It is called critical realism or transcendental realism, and it seems to be showing a certain excitement among those who aspire to social science.
And it explains how mainstream economics is something that is completely useless. It is not because of Bhaskar, but because mainstream economics alone is not scientific (not logical). It refutes (I suppose that's what you'd call it) from a perspective completely different from so-called MMT or "Introduction to Schumpeter," so there is an interest in that sense as well.
But, the true value of this book is, after all, Bhaskar's approach to social science. I plan to introduce it in detail in the next article and beyond.

Table of contents of this book

I plan to structure the articles according to the structure of the book. Therefore, I will post the table of contents of this book.

Mainstream economics is not science

In Chapter 1 What is Positive Economics of this book, it states that mainstream economics is positivism and explains how it is "not science."

Unrealistic assumptions used by mainstream economics

As is well known, mainstream economics is based on unrealistic assumptions such as the following p26.

• Rational economic man

  • An individual who acts rationally to maximize their own economic interests

  • Autonomous and unaffected by society

• Based on general equilibrium theory

  • Demand and supply match for all goods

  • Does not assume money (a world of barter)

Free trade is one of the mantras endorsed by mainstream economics, but page 27 notes that this also makes the following unrealistic assumptions.

• The world consists of only two countries, two goods, and one factor of production (labor) exists

• Production volume is proportional to scale occurs

• Labor is at full employment

• Factors of production do not change

• Labor and capital can move freely within the country. International movement is not possible.International movement is not possible.

• Transportation costs are zero.

Mainstream economics is supposed to be empirical economics, but...

　Milton Friedman is like the embodiment of mainstream economics, and in 1953 he wrote a paper called "The Methodology of Positive Economics." According to this, "positive science" is,

In other words, "positive science" is about being able to make valid and meaningful predictions, and constructing hypotheses and theories for that purpose.

And he cites mathematical formal models as simple and useful "hypotheses." Thus, in mainstream economics, they have "devoted themselves to constructing theories using mathematical formal models based on unrealistic processes." "For non-mainstream economics or non-mathematical, descriptive theories in political science and sociology, they shrug and say, 'Since there are no mathematical formulas, there is no way to judge whether it is correct or not'." p33. Oh my, Mr. Yoichi Takahashi is doing this!

　In the first chapter, the following pages are devoted to clarifying that Friedman's, this methodology is not positivism, but instrumentalism. Even if it is instrumentalism, it is "full of serious flaws and contradictions, and moreover, they are layered, so it is by no means something that can be accepted," p51.

　If you are interested, please check the book directly.

　By the way, while saying that being able to predict is important, not a single mainstream economist was able to predict the Lehman Shock, ("most mainstream economists did not even anticipate the financial crisis"), p51.

Future plans...

　So, I will be introducing this book. Basically, I plan to introduce two chapters at a time from here on, but I might do one chapter at a time depending on the chapter. I would appreciate it if you could watch over me with warm eyes, keeping in mind that plans are subject to change.

Regardless of whether it is inside or outside a quote, the distinction between bold and regular text was made by the author of this article.
Regarding the numbers in the text, regardless of whether they are inside or outside a quote, the author of this article uses either Chinese numerals or Roman numerals based on which is judged to be easier to read at the time.
Also, I am correcting errors in wording and clarity of expression as needed. Please understand.

Bonus: For those who want to further broaden their insights or deepen their knowledge

I'll post some things that caught my attention after a quick search.
There are some books here I haven't read yet either, but I hope this is helpful for your reference.

Works by Takeshi Nakano

MMT-related

Others: Works by Takeshi Nakano

As a writer and an active bureaucrat, Takeshi Nakano is so prolific that it makes you wonder, 'How does he find the time to write all this?' Among his works, I've picked out the ones that caught my attention.

I bought it, but haven't been able to read it yet. I'm hesitating because of its thickness.

I'd like to read this one.

An active bureaucrat can openly criticize his own government's policies. I hope we can continue to guarantee that kind of freedom of speech in the future.

Interview article

The author speaks: Video

Milton Friedman

The infamous Chicago Boys and the Argentine economy that was ruined by them.

Works by Roy Bhaskar

Extra: Irish whiskey named Busker

When you search on Amazon, the first thing that comes up for 'Busker' is Irish whiskey. It seems to have a good reputation. Maybe I should try it?

Rumor has it that the red one is particularly vibrant and delicious...