3 ms·

Cool. One thing I hated about my Econ minor was that so much of undergraduate economics education assumes conditions which are never true. It’s like studying ae

by anbop 7y ago

Cool. One thing I hated about my Econ minor was that so much of undergraduate economics education assumes conditions which are never true. It’s like studying aerospace engineering and only introducing air resistance in graduate school.

333c 7y ago
Good comparison. This is how I felt when I took ECON 101. Though I was fascinated with the concepts, they felt so far from reality as to be effectively useless.
- WalterBright 7y ago
  My economics professor stated in lecture that he believed in the free enterprise system and the equal distribution of all income. I avoided taking any more econ classes. Dismal science, indeed.
- notfromhere 7y ago
  That's what ECON 101 is, you need to get deeper into the curriculum. It's like complaining intro to algebra didn't teach you differential equations
  - 333c 7y ago
    The problem was that this stance was used to justify claims like "the free market allocates resources in the most efficient way" and "all taxes incur a deadweight loss" which are big statements to make based on such basic coursework. If the class is going to make claims like these, it needs to start with realistic assumptions.
Kalium 7y ago
My Newtonian physics courses taught projectile motion without really getting into the weeds on how to calculate air resistance. Given how complicated that can be and the much greater sophistication of mathematics involved, I think this is a reasonable choice. I don't think anybody walked out of those lectures believing that air resistance doesn't exist. Models, in my obviously limited experience, have the potential to be incredibly useful instructional tools. You can start with the unrealistic assumptions that are literally never true to get the basic points across, and then bring it stepwise closer to reality from them. Starting people off with the fluid dynamics to calculate air resistance reasonably accurately in projectile motion seems like it might make teaching Newtonian physics almost intractably difficult. On top of requiring a much more advanced understanding of mathematics than one can universally assume a college freshman is possessed of.
- mrguyorama 7y ago
  The difference is physics 101 allows you to make pretty accurate predictions and statements about the real world. Econ 101 does not do the same if you ignore personal ideology

by anbop 7y ago

333c 7y ago

Good comparison. This is how I felt when I took ECON 101. Though I was fascinated with the concepts, they felt so far from reality as to be effectively useless.

WalterBright 7y ago
My economics professor stated in lecture that he believed in the free enterprise system and the equal distribution of all income. I avoided taking any more econ classes. Dismal science, indeed.
notfromhere 7y ago
That's what ECON 101 is, you need to get deeper into the curriculum. It's like complaining intro to algebra didn't teach you differential equations
- 333c 7y ago
  The problem was that this stance was used to justify claims like "the free market allocates resources in the most efficient way" and "all taxes incur a deadweight loss" which are big statements to make based on such basic coursework. If the class is going to make claims like these, it needs to start with realistic assumptions.

Kalium 7y ago

My Newtonian physics courses taught projectile motion without really getting into the weeds on how to calculate air resistance. Given how complicated that can be and the much greater sophistication of mathematics involved, I think this is a reasonable choice. I don't think anybody walked out of those lectures believing that air resistance doesn't exist. Models, in my obviously limited experience, have the potential to be incredibly useful instructional tools. You can start with the unrealistic assumptions that are literally never true to get the basic points across, and then bring it stepwise closer to reality from them. Starting people off with the fluid dynamics to calculate air resistance reasonably accurately in projectile motion seems like it might make teaching Newtonian physics almost intractably difficult. On top of requiring a much more advanced understanding of mathematics than one can universally assume a college freshman is possessed of.

mrguyorama 7y ago
The difference is physics 101 allows you to make pretty accurate predictions and statements about the real world. Econ 101 does not do the same if you ignore personal ideology