Stubborn Attachments is a book by Tyler Cowen that paints a picture of an altruistic and bright future for the human race. Cohen argues and highlights the importance of sustained economic growth, moral philosophy and consequentialism, radical uncertainty, rules-based ethics, that future generations matter deeply, and how we as a race must be stubbornly attached to certain core principles as the necessary pre-conditions for sustainable prosperity. To be honest I avoid books like this, because they are hard. I mean, where do you start pulling apart such a broad and complicated topic. I thank Cohen for expanding my thinking towards civilization and painting the broad brushstrokes of a future pathway our race must strive for.
In a nutshell
Cowen argues that long-term economic growth is the single most important factor that contributes to improving human welfare (1) under a form of moral philosophy and consequentialism he refers to as “wealth plus” utilitarianism, growth that values not just blind GDP but also leisure, environmental quality, and rights (2). Cohen then tackles the problem of uncertainty; our world and social fabric suffers from radical uncertainty; given the difficulty in precisely predicting the future (3) civilization has no choice but to follow simple, robust moral rules. He further ties off the problem of uncertainty, making the case that ethical decision-making should prioritise the well-being of future generations (4). Cohen concludes by arguing for commitment to free markets, rights, and rule of law as necessary conditions for sustainable prosperity.
Themes
1. The Power of Innovation and the Right Incentives
Cowen argues that the biggest improvements in human well-being come from major innovations; think vaccines, electricity, the internet. These breakthroughs shape civilization and elevate standards of living for generations. But why do they happen? The right incentives.
He illustrates this by discussing how large markets reward hard innovation, while small ones do not. Take the iPhone: if Apple’s only market were a small country like New Zealand, the expected returns wouldn’t justify the billions in R&D. The USA, with its vast consumer base and deep capital markets, creates the right conditions for transformative inventions. Small rewards stifle ambition; big rewards make the impossible seem worth pursuing.
This principle is echoed in fields like medicine. Think how costly it was to develop the first mRNA (messenger ribonucleic acid are a single-stranded molecule of RNA that corresponds to a genetic sequence) vaccines. Would they have happened without the promise of global demand and government-backed incentives? Likely not. Cowen stresses that if we fail to reward risk-takers, we cut ourselves off from future prosperity.
2. The Crusonia Plant: Growth, Investment, and Tough Decisions
Cowen introduces the Crusonia plant as a metaphor for investments that yield exponential returns. The term comes from Robinson Crusoe (Daniel Defoe), where Crusoe finds a plant that keeps growing indefinitely, providing continuous food with minimal effort. Economist Frank Knight later used it to describe capital and investment: some resources, if nurtured, keep growing and paying off far into the future.
Why does this matter? Because choosing between short-term comfort and long-term gains is hard. Cowen argues that great societies recognise when to prioritise future growth over immediate gratification.
Consider a government deciding between funding universal basic income (short-term relief) or AI research (potentially transformative growth). One provides security now; the other might change civilization forever. The Crusonia concept reminds us that certain investments, like education, infrastructure, and research, have compounding benefits that are worth prioritising, even when they require sacrifice today.
3. The Epistemic Critique: Can We Ever Know the Full Impact of Our Actions?
Cowen acknowledges a common objection to consequentialism: how can we base morality on consequences when we barely understand their long-term effects?
This is where David Schmidtz’s critique comes in: Can we have the correct moral theory if we cannot know 90% of what counts towards a good outcome? Imagine stopping at a yellow traffic light, which is seemingly a minor decision, right? But by delaying traffic, you alter when and where people meet, which affects relationships, marriages, and even births. The exact moment of conception is altered for millions. So did your action just change the course of human history?
The D-Day thought experiment by philosopher James Lenman highlights the challenge of uncertainty in decision-making. Imagine you must choose between two beaches for the Allied invasion of Nazi occupied France. One choice might lead to a swift victory, the other to disaster. However, complicating matters, one of the options comes with a seemingly trivial consequence—a dog’s leg will be broken. Does this minor harm matter in the face of a world altering decision? And even if you choose what seems like the superior option, what if the decision turns out to be wrong anyway? The scenario underscores how uncertainty clouds consequentialist reasoning. If we can never fully predict outcomes, how can we be certain we are making the right moral choice?
Cowen’s takeaway: uncertainty is a given, but that doesn’t mean we should abandon moral rules. Instead, we should follow simple, robust principles; like property rights, free markets, and human dignity, because they generally lead to good long-term outcomes, even if we can’t predict every ripple effect.
4. Is Time an Illusion? Why We Owe the Future More Than We Think
One of Cowen’s most thought provoking ideas is how we treat the future. Most people discount the well being of future generations simply because they “aren’t here yet.” But why should time matter?
He puts it bluntly:
“It cannot be argued that their forthcoming slice of time is worth less simply because they must wait for it.”
Imagine a child born in 2075. Why should their life be valued less than someone born in 1975? Yet when people make decisions, whether about climate change, public debt, or technological risks, they overwhelmingly favor short-term benefits.
Cowen points out that when given the choice between immediate benefits and long-term gains, most people choose the present or near-future almost instinctively. This cognitive bias leads to underinvestment in future focused projects like clean energy, scientific research, and education.
His challenge to readers: if we truly care about human welfare, we must think beyond ourselves and invest in a future we may never see.
Fundamental Concepts
Altruism
Acting for the benefit of others, sometimes at personal cost. Effective altruism, for example, applies evidence and reason to maximize the positive impact of charitable efforts. Cowen’s concern for future generations aligns with a long-term form of altruism.
Consequentialism
A moral philosophy that judges actions based on their outcomes. The core idea is that the right action is the one that produces the best overall results. The most well known form is utilitarianism, which aims to maximize happiness or well being. A key challenge with consequentialism is that predicting long-term consequences is often difficult, raising questions about how we can reliably determine the “best” action.
Epistemic
The relationship to knowledge. Often used in contexts like “epistemic humility” (recognising the limits of our knowledge) or “epistemic uncertainty” (acknowledging that we can never be fully certain about the future or complex systems). Cowen uses epistemic ideas to emphasize why we should be cautious and rules-based in decision-making.
Nihilism
What’s the point of it all?
The belief that life lacks inherent meaning, value, or purpose. In philosophy, it can lead to moral nihilism (denying objective moral truths) or existential nihilism (doubting any ultimate purpose in life). Cowen contrasts this with the need for meaningful commitments to long-term values.
Pluralism
The idea that multiple values or principles can coexist, sometimes conflicting, without a single overarching rule to resolve them. Moral pluralism means different ethical values (e.g., liberty, equality, and happiness) may all be important but cannot always be reduced to one another.
Utilitarianism
A moral philosophy that judges actions based on their consequences, aiming to maximize overall happiness or well-being. Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill were key figures in its development. In Cowen’s context, he adapts utilitarianism to prioritise long-term economic growth and well-being he refers to as Wealth Plus.