Dierdre McCloskey rightfully chides economists for 'prudence only' morality. With prudence only we would fall far short of the bourgeois, liberal virtues that she posits have made the world a richer and more peaceful place.
Here is 'prudence only' on full display, and everything that's wrong with it. Yes, it's better that Templeton can be persuaded to help Wilbur than that he can't, but we don't cheer for those who could save a life for free but do it only because they are paid, and we don't lament when others are suitably unimpressed. And sure, I guess all of the other animals on the farm are even bigger moral monsters--but this suggests that we're maybe trying to press an economics lesson from where one doesn't belong. It's a kid's book, not a Kafka novel.
We get into this mess through a vulgar intrusion of economic decision making into what McCloskey usefully calls "the sacred"--the parts of our morality that should be outside the realm of economic calculation. There's nothing peaceful about predatory commerce.
