> To actually think "the most important lesson about economics is: One must consider not just what is seen, but also unseen." is incredibly naive, plain silly a

> To actually think "the most important lesson about economics is: One must consider not just what is seen, but also unseen." is incredibly naive, plain silly and quite stupid, to be blunt. Really? When I read that sentence, I cannot be sure it is false to begin with. First, the statement isn't completely vacuous. In many domains, we are making measures to see if we are "doing well". Then we forget that "doing well" and "maximizing the measured criteria" aren't the same thing. Sometimes, we even game the system, so the two become wildly different. This is what LessWrong calls a "lost purpose"[1]. Obvious examples are the GDP and the grade system in schools. Now, imagine for a second that you don't follow that lesson (which, I repeat, often happens). Could you do economics well enough to do more good than harm? Hardly, in my opinion. So maybe that's not the most important lesson, but it's close. [1]: http://lesswrong.com/lw/le/lost_purposes/ http://lesswrong.com/lw/le/lost_purposes/