3 ms·
Unfortunately, making policy isn't a matter of epistemology. If we prevented ourselves from making any kind of decisions due to uncertainty about our empirical
by james-mcelwain 7y ago
Unfortunately, making policy isn't a matter of epistemology. If we prevented ourselves from making any kind of decisions due to uncertainty about our empirical claims, we would be stuck in a kind of ethical paralysis that would prevent any kind of coordinated policy.
To argue that inherent complexity means we should remain in a state of inaction is in itself a form of denialism. The fact that it is difficult to make predictions about chaotic systems does not mean that the null hypothesis is automatically true.
- whydoyoucare 7y agoI don't know any example where a legislation (especially which levied tax) was rolled back because the argument no longer held true. And hence my skepticism of "carbon taxes". Additionally, I do not see anyone arguing a moderate position on legislation, which logically follows, considering the data may be wrong. Action based on potentially incorrect data is as big a problem as much as the null hypothesis you define. I am hard pressed to see a legislation that talks about reducing materialistic consumption, or living frugal, but we are very interested in increasing taxes. No?