Pete, I humbly suggest that most economists do use models (of their own design of course) and that has been part of the circular 'proofs' fallacy of the field. I posted the abstract and .pdf of a debunking paper on this yesterday. non-equilibrium economics deals with unknown future wild cards which cannot always be imagined in model design. Plus, as Korzybski said: "the map is not the territory."
Steve On Sep 7, 2013, at 7:47 PM, pete wrote: > > > On Sat, 7 Sep 2013, Ray Harrell wrote: > >> >> SK: My comments re Crudman relate to neoclassical economics BS >> >> >> >> I guess Steve that he could be talking about all of us:>)) REH >> >> >> >> >> Neo Fights (Slightly Wonkish and Vague) by Paul Krugman Blog nytimes: >> August 28, 2012, 9:23 am >> >> >> Via <http://economistsview.typepad.com/> Mark Thoma, David Glasner gets >> upset over claims by Austrians to have rejected or superseded neoclassical >> economics. >> <http://uneasymoney.com/2012/08/27/hayek-was-a-neoclassical-yes-neoclassical >> -economist/> Hayek was a neoclassical economist,Glasner declares. > > [...] > >> What would truly non-neoclassical economics look like? It would involve >> rejecting both the simplification of maximizing behavior, going for full >> behavioral, and rejecting the simplification of equilibrium, going for a >> dynamic story with no end state. >> >> And there is economics like this: >> <http://www2.econ.iastate.edu/tesfatsi/ace.htm> agent-based economics. It's >> a project that relies heavily on computing, to keep track of the >> complexities, and at this point makes simplifying assumptions that are in >> their own way as unrealistic - but in a different direction! - as those of >> neoclassical work. Still, it's a good thing to pursue. > > Wow, Ray, thanks for that link. It looks like (some small number of > heretical) economists are finally beginning to look at using real > simulation software to actually understand economies instead of > using computers to add pointless decorations to their groundless > pronouncements. > > I like this title which comes up from browsing a ways into the maze of > links which branch out of that one: > > Aki Lehtinen and Jaakko Kuorikoski, "Computing the Perfect Model: Why Do > Economists Shun Simulation?" (pdf,115KB), Philosophy of Science 74 (July > 2007) pp. 304.329. > > Abstract: "Like other mathematically intensive sciences, economics > is becoming increasingly computerized. Despite the extent of the > computation, however, there is very little true simulation. Simple > computation is a form of theory articulation, whereas true simulation is > analogous to an experimental procedure. Successful computation is > faithful to an underlying mathematical model, whereas successful > simulation directly mimics a process or a system. The computer is seen > as a legitimate tool in economics only when traditional analytical > solutions cannot be derived, i.e., only as a purely computational aid. > We argue that true simulation is seldom practiced because it does not > fit the conception of understanding inherent in mainstream economics. > According to this conception, understanding is constituted by analytical > derivation from a set of fundamental economic axioms. We articulate this > conception using the concept of economists' perfect model. Since the > deductive links between the assumptions and the consequences are not > transparent in .bottom-up' generative microsimulations, microsimulations > cannot correspond to the perfect model and economists do not therefore > consider them viable candidates for generating theories that enhance > economic understanding." > > Kinda sounds like my perennial complaint, only a decade after I first > voiced it here. I believe they're saying it appears economists don't > like to use simulations because it limits them to speaking about > actual results, rather than making stuff up. > > -Pete > > _______________________________________________ > Futurework mailing list > Futurework@lists.uwaterloo.ca > https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework _______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list Futurework@lists.uwaterloo.ca https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
