4 ms·
My first exposure to really opportunity to contemplate economics, in even a qualitative sense, came with Dierdre McClosky's essay in the early days of "post-aut
by killjoywashere 7y ago
My first exposure to really opportunity to contemplate economics, in even a qualitative sense, came with Dierdre McClosky's essay in the early days of "post-autistic" economics (1-3). Her observations about the flimsiness of economic modeling, verging on simply serving as a veil naked capitalism, struck me as the sort of informed cynicism I could hold onto. 17 years later, it's her disdain for economic models in comparison to physical models that sticks with me.
(1-3): I honestly forget which of these it was, but the key term I search for is "mind-breakingly"
https://www.deirdremccloskey.com/docs/paradigm.pdf https://www.deirdremccloskey.com/docs/paradigm.pdf
http://www.deirdremccloskey.com/docs/pdf/Article_320.pdf http://www.deirdremccloskey.com/docs/pdf/Article_320.pdf
https://www.deirdremccloskey.com/articles/stats/stats.php https://www.deirdremccloskey.com/articles/stats/stats.php
- gcbw3 7y agoI only skimmed the first two links, which have no citations, and read like a diatribe from someone who miss basic premisses in economy, sociology, anthropology (that are taught at a 101 class on those subjects) while making a grandiose case that people are not taught Statistics 101 before writing works based on statistic! It is full of opinion (e.g. the author has the opinion that free market solved gender equality and made the poor richer [1] p.18). Looks more like satire and internal jokes (trolling?) than an academic work.