4 ms·

Liked this quote: The range of analogies commonly utilised in public debate is depressingly small – almost any event of significance is related to either the i

by dash2 8y ago

Liked this quote: The range of analogies commonly utilised in public debate is depressingly small – almost any event of significance is related to either the international crises of the 1930s or the economic turmoil of the 1970s. Historians are equipped to enrich that pool with more exotic alternatives. The article is surprisingly silent about the obvious alternative: social science. Economists and political scientists claim to use historical data in a disciplined, methodical way to make predictions. Personally, I don't buy that claim, but the author didn't think it worth discussing.

jgmjgm 8y ago
Why would you complain about the author not answering a question that the article is not about? I'd like to quibble with the term prediction in this context too. I think it's too strong to say that social scientists use historical data to make predictions. They would use historical data to make inferences about the likely causes of events and use that insight to inform policy going forward. That is not prediction but gaining insight into probable outcomes if certain things are done in certain contexts. The closest one might come to prediction would be economic forecasting where one looks at various patterns in the data to make an, ahem, educated guesses about likely outcomes. This too is not exactly prediction because one is interested in the likelihood of a range of outcomes. Even those who do these things for a living admit that this is, at best, a guessing game. (As JK Galbraith once quipped, "The only function of economic forecasting is to make astrology look respectable")
dredmorbius 8y ago
There are historians who apply a scientific perspective, and identify with the soccial, or at times, physical, sciences. Peter Turchin: https://evolution-institute.org/profile/peter-turchin/ https://evolution-institute.org/profile/peter-turchin/ David Christian (Big History) and Kyle Harper (U. OK) comee to mind. Economic's and economists' record wwith historical data and theory is an exceptionally poor standard to follow. (There are some exceptions to the rule.)

by dash2 8y ago

jgmjgm 8y ago

Why would you complain about the author not answering a question that the article is not about? I'd like to quibble with the term prediction in this context too. I think it's too strong to say that social scientists use historical data to make predictions. They would use historical data to make inferences about the likely causes of events and use that insight to inform policy going forward. That is not prediction but gaining insight into probable outcomes if certain things are done in certain contexts. The closest one might come to prediction would be economic forecasting where one looks at various patterns in the data to make an, ahem, educated guesses about likely outcomes. This too is not exactly prediction because one is interested in the likelihood of a range of outcomes. Even those who do these things for a living admit that this is, at best, a guessing game. (As JK Galbraith once quipped, "The only function of economic forecasting is to make astrology look respectable")

dredmorbius 8y ago

There are historians who apply a scientific perspective, and identify with the soccial, or at times, physical, sciences. Peter Turchin: https://evolution-institute.org/profile/peter-turchin/ https://evolution-institute.org/profile/peter-turchin/ David Christian (Big History) and Kyle Harper (U. OK) comee to mind. Economic's and economists' record wwith historical data and theory is an exceptionally poor standard to follow. (There are some exceptions to the rule.)