by From Ken Zimmerman “The propositions of economic theory are derived by logical reasoning from these assumptions in exactly the same way as the theorems of geometry are derived from the axioms upon which the system is built.” Which without fail ends with the conclusion you set out, “A theory as an internally consistent system is valid if the conclusions follow logically from its premises, and the fact that neither the premises nor the conclusions correspond to reality may show that the theory is not very useful, but does not invalidate it. In any pure theory, all propositions are essentially tautological, in the sense that the results are implicit in the assumptions made.” But then physical scientists make what is for them an obvious next step; they move to observations while holding
Topics:
Editor considers the following as important: Uncategorized
This could be interesting, too:
Lars Pålsson Syll writes DSGE models — a total waste of time
tom writes Gaza in context: past, present, & future
Peter Radford writes Lost opportunities?
Bill Haskell writes Very Ill Again
from Ken Zimmerman
“The propositions of economic theory are derived by logical reasoning from these assumptions in exactly the same way as the theorems of geometry are derived from the axioms upon which the system is built.” Which without fail ends with the conclusion you set out, “A theory as an internally consistent system is valid if the conclusions follow logically from its premises, and the fact that neither the premises nor the conclusions correspond to reality may show that the theory is not very useful, but does not invalidate it. In any pure theory, all propositions are essentially tautological, in the sense that the results are implicit in the assumptions made.” But then physical scientists make what is for them an obvious next step; they move to observations while holding the theory, every theory in the background. The theories that don’t conform with the observations are set aside. Then additional observations are made guided by the remaining theory(ies). And the process repeats. Until all but one or two theories are eliminated. Then, the scientists design observations, data gathering, experiments, etc. based on predictions from these remaining theories. In basic areas of physical science this work may take decades or even centuries. But even seemingly straight forward work may require a decade or more. For example, for atmospheric scientists, chemists, meteorologists, etc. to determine the origins of “acid rain” required 15 years. Economists must follow the same path, if scientific research is their goal. But doing so would of course deny them the chance to give “quick” answers to “complex” questions. An action near and dear to the hearts of today’s economists.
https://rwer.wordpress.com/2019/04/15/economics-vs-the-natural-sciences-the-methodology-of-as-if/#comments