The Morality of Economics

I read an article for an EdX class I'm taking called Theo-Humanism. A former theology professor shared the course with me (he's teaching it).

The Secular Religions of Progress describes how economics was initially philosophical. Scholars contemplated how best to organize the marketplace to achieve the highest level of welfare. Through an understanding of humanity, societies, and our relationship with nature, economists believed the most fruitful theory could be enacted. The subject's foundation came from such theological inquires, not mathematical truths. How can we reach an ideal condition on Earth through economic means?

Now, though, economics has a set of assumptions that seem misaligned with essential realities. The basic goal is presumed to be maximum growth in perpetuity in every possible way. Economists aren't moral philosophers who study what is ideal for prosperity, but instead technocrats directing policy and resources towards this one goal, growth. Is this really what we should aim for anymore, especially in industrialized countries? Are the ways we define welfare still accurate?

I think there are rumblings of change in public discourse. Andrew Yang has spoken on this topic, and the Happiness Index has gained traction as a better metric for success than classic economic metrics. Given the problems we face today that have not and probably will not be solved by growth (climate change & environmental degradation, rising rates of Deaths of Despair, racial inequality, populist authoritarian governments, international migration, proxy wars), the need to re-evaluate how we organize the economy appears prudent. Maybe that means returning to the roots of economics itself.