David Warsh's book describes a great contradiction inherent in economic theory since 1776, when Adam Smith published . ███ ██████ ██ ████████ █████ █████ ██ ███ ████████ ███████ ███ ███ ███████ ███ ███ █████████ █████
█████ ███ ███████ ██ █ ███ ████████ █████ ██████████ ███ ████ █████████ ██ ██████████ ████ █████ ██ ████████ ███████ █████████ █████ ███ ███ █████████ ██████████ ██ ████████████ ██ ██████ ██████ ███████ ███ ████ ████ ████ █████ ██ ████ ██████ ██████████████ ███
█████ ███ █████████ ████████ ███ ███████ ██ ████ ██████ ███ ███████ ██ ███ ███ ███████ ████ ████ █████ ███ ██████████ ███████ ██ ███████████ ██████ ███ ███ ████████ ███ ████ ███████████ ███ ███████ ███ ███ ███ █████████ ███ ████ ████ ███ ███████ ███ ███████ ███ ███████ ███ ██████████ ███████ ██████ █ ███████ ████████ ██████ █████████ ███████ █ █████ ████████ ███ ███████ ██████ █████ ███ █████ █████ █████ ████ █ █████ █████████ ██ █████ ██████████ ████████ ██████ █████ ████ ██ █████ ███████ █████ ███ ██ █████████ █████ ████ ████████ ██ █████████ ██ ████ █ ███ ████████ ███ ███ ███ █████████ ████ ██ ████ █████████ █████ ████ ██ ████ ███████████ ██ ████ █████████ ██ ████ ██████ ███ █████ ████████ ██████ ███
███ ██████ ███ ██████████ ███ ██████████ ██ ███████████ ███████ █████████ ████████ ███████ ████ ███ ███ ███████ ██████████████ ████ ██ █████ █████████ ██ ██████ █████ █████████ ██ ███ █████ █████████ ███ ████ ██ █████ ████████████ ███████████ █████████ ███ ██████ ███ ██████████ ████████████ ██████████ ████ ██████ ██████ ███ █████ ███ ███████ ████ █████ ████ ████████████ █████ █████ █████ ███████ ███ ██████████ ███ ███ █████████ ██ ███████████ ███████ ████ ██████████ ███████ ██ ███████ ██████████ █████ █████ ██ ██████████ █████████████ ███ █████████████ ███████████ ████ ██ █████████ ███████████████
████ ██████████ █████ ██████████ ██ █████ ███ ███ ███████ ████ ███ ██████████ ██ ████████ ███████ ██ ███████ ███ ████ ████ ██████████ ███████ █████████ █████████████ ████ ████████████ ████ ██
The author's attitude towards the ████ ████ ███ ███ ███████ █████ ██████ ██ ████ ██ ███ ██████████ ██ ████████ ███████ █████ ████ ██████████ ██ █████████ ██ ███ ██
What’s the author’s attitude toward the Pin Factory becoming part of mainstream thought? The author notes that the model of the Pin Factory “obviously” characterized many enterprises. So the author probably thinks it’s good that the Pin Factory became part of mainstream thought, since it describes at least part of the world accurately.
hostility
There’s no evidence of a negative attitude toward the Pin Factory model.
uncertainty
There’s no evidence of uncertainty toward the Pin Factory model. The author notes that the model of the Pin Factory “obviously” characterized many enterprises. So the author probably thinks it’s good that the Pin Factory became part of mainstream thought.
curiosity
There’s no evidence the author is curious about the Pin Factory’s becoming part of economic thought. She doesn’t ask more questions about it or suggest that there’s some mystery or further issues to investigate.
indifference
“Indifference” suggests the author doesn’t care about the Pin Factory becoming part of economic thought. This doesn’t fit, because the author has at least a slightly positive attitude toward this issue. After all, the author notes that the model of the Pin Factory “obviously” characterized many enterprises. So the author probably thinks it’s good that the Pin Factory became part of mainstream thought.
receptivity
This is the best answer. The author notes that the model of the Pin Factory “obviously” characterized many enterprises. So the author probably thinks it’s good that the Pin Factory became part of mainstream thought.