by Summary:
I was part of an epic Twitter thread yesterday, initially drawn in to a conversation about whether the word "mainstream" (vs "heterodox") was used in natural sciences (to which I said: not really, but the concept exists). There was one sub-thread that asked a question that is really more a history of science question (I am not a historian of science, so this is my own distillation of others' work as well a couple of my undergrad research papers). Useful relative to philosophy of science and history of science, as well as foundations of economics. Philosophy of science makes use of the history of science. It is also relevant to the orthodox and heterodox debate in economics. Information Transfer EconomicsWhat to theorize when your theory's rejectedJason Smith
Topics:
Mike Norman considers the following as important: economics and physics, foundations of economics, history of science, Noah Smith, philosophy of science, Simon Wren-Lewis
This could be interesting, too:
I was part of an epic Twitter thread yesterday, initially drawn in to a conversation about whether the word "mainstream" (vs "heterodox") was used in natural sciences (to which I said: not really, but the concept exists). There was one sub-thread that asked a question that is really more a history of science question (I am not a historian of science, so this is my own distillation of others' work as well a couple of my undergrad research papers). Useful relative to philosophy of science and history of science, as well as foundations of economics. Philosophy of science makes use of the history of science. It is also relevant to the orthodox and heterodox debate in economics. Information Transfer EconomicsWhat to theorize when your theory's rejectedJason Smith
Topics:
Mike Norman considers the following as important: economics and physics, foundations of economics, history of science, Noah Smith, philosophy of science, Simon Wren-Lewis
This could be interesting, too:
Robert Waldmann writes Anopinion 3
Robert Waldmann writes Anopinion 1/N
Mike Norman writes Neoliberalism: Are We Sure That’s the Right Word?: Talking to Noah Smith —Brad DeLong
Mike Norman writes Lars P. Syll — The ergodicity problem in economics (wonkish)
I was part of an epic Twitter thread yesterday, initially drawn in to a conversation about whether the word "mainstream" (vs "heterodox") was used in natural sciences (to which I said: not really, but the concept exists). There was one sub-thread that asked a question that is really more a history of science question (I am not a historian of science, so this is my own distillation of others' work as well a couple of my undergrad research papers).
Useful relative to philosophy of science and history of science, as well as foundations of economics. Philosophy of science makes use of the history of science.
It is also relevant to the orthodox and heterodox debate in economics.
What to theorize when your theory's rejected
Jason Smith