by On the explanatory irrelevance of general equilibrium models The model itself seems to provide no indication of how to find out under which real conditions its nomological content … has explanatory relevance. The assertion that it has such relevance if the corresponding ‘assumptions’ are satisfied is either (1) a purely logical statement — that is, if these assumptions are to be identified with the supreme hypotheses of the system itself; (2) a highly problematic statement — if the explicit if-components (antecedent clauses) of these hypotheses are meant; or (3) a completely useless statement — if it refers to the so-far-unknown conditions under which the idealizations are true. div{float:left;margin-right:10px;} div.wpmrec2x div.u >
Topics:
Lars Pålsson Syll considers the following as important: Economics
This could be interesting, too:
Lars Pålsson Syll writes DSGE models — a total waste of time
Lars Pålsson Syll writes Was MMT right about inflation? Yes!
Lars Pålsson Syll writes Brownian motion (student stuff)
Lars Pålsson Syll writes Keynes — en ständigt aktuell inspiration
On the explanatory irrelevance of general equilibrium models
The model itself seems to provide no indication of how to find out under which real conditions its nomological content … has explanatory relevance. The assertion that it has such relevance if the corresponding ‘assumptions’ are satisfied is either (1) a purely logical statement — that is, if these assumptions are to be identified with the supreme hypotheses of the system itself; (2) a highly problematic statement — if the explicit if-components (antecedent clauses) of these hypotheses are meant; or (3) a completely useless statement — if it refers to the so-far-unknown conditions under which the idealizations are true.