by Summary:
The epistemological and logic problems are not due to either models or their assumptions but rather misinterpreting what a model says about the world realisitically. Models are necessarily simplifications, since their purpose is to encapsulate as well as explain. The probems arise typically in assumptions about the application of models as accounts of real events. A major issue is over-generalizing by taking a model that illustrates a special cases and extending its scope to other cases or even taking the model as representing the general case. This is similiar to the logic of conspiracy theories that take some aspects of a case and build and a complete argument around them when there is other relevant information. The intent is conspiracy theory is sophistical, regardless
Topics:
Mike Norman considers the following as important: conventional economics, economic modeling, economics and conspiracy theory, economics and logic, persuasion
This could be interesting, too:
The epistemological and logic problems are not due to either models or their assumptions but rather misinterpreting what a model says about the world realisitically. Models are necessarily simplifications, since their purpose is to encapsulate as well as explain. The probems arise typically in assumptions about the application of models as accounts of real events. A major issue is over-generalizing by taking a model that illustrates a special cases and extending its scope to other cases or even taking the model as representing the general case. This is similiar to the logic of conspiracy theories that take some aspects of a case and build and a complete argument around them when there is other relevant information. The intent is conspiracy theory is sophistical, regardless
Topics:
Mike Norman considers the following as important: conventional economics, economic modeling, economics and conspiracy theory, economics and logic, persuasion
This could be interesting, too:
Mike Norman writes David Ricardo’s explanation of the case for free trade rests on some basic economic principles, but also has a big public policy blind spot — Miles Corak
Mike Norman writes The old guard trying to stay relevant and failing — Bill Mitchell
Mike Norman writes Lars P. Syll — Economics — too important to be left to economists
Mike Norman writes Lars P. Syll — Does it–really–take a model to beat a model?
Models are necessarily simplifications, since their purpose is to encapsulate as well as explain. The probems arise typically in assumptions about the application of models as accounts of real events.
A major issue is over-generalizing by taking a model that illustrates a special cases and extending its scope to other cases or even taking the model as representing the general case.
This is similiar to the logic of conspiracy theories that take some aspects of a case and build and a complete argument around them when there is other relevant information.
The intent is conspiracy theory is sophistical, regardless of whether those perpetrating it realize this consciously or act intentionally. It is false logic used to persuade.
A lot of conventional economics, especially scaling up micro by extending its scope to macro, is like conspiracy theory. It is based on the false necessity of microfoundations, which runs the risk of falling into the fallacy of compositioin, a freshman error in logic.
A worse error is doubling down on outcomes that disconfirm a model's representational claims by ad hoc measures, saying that the world has to be changed to fit the model, trying to discredit the inconvenient results with more sophistry, or just ignoring the results.
Lars P. Syll’s Blog
Rethinking expectations
Lars P. Syll | Professor, Malmo University
Joseph Stiglitz explains.