3 ms·
I think my concern here would be people weighting their ideas/opinions far too much on mathematical models that may, or may not represent the complex economic r
by carlgreene 2y ago
I think my concern here would be people weighting their ideas/opinions far too much on mathematical models that may, or may not represent the complex economic reality.
We already see this with people arguing with near 100% confidence of X happening because of Y and Z…in a vacuum.
I want to see something similar to what you’re asking, don’t get me wrong. But the underbelly of that is a broken clock being right twice a day and far too much weight and decision making being put into some model that doesn’t actually reflect reality
- xpe 2y agoThe solution to a bad model is more models :). I'm joking but serious. "All models are wrong, but some are useful."
- dwattttt 2y agoAlthough also responsive, the solution to incorrectly applying models _isn't_ to get more models, it's to understand the mistakes being made in applying them.
- xpe 2y agoTrue. I'll add a few points: - Statistically, more models tends to be better (in the same sense that more information is better) under the assumption that people can tell better from worse. - I like how you talk about _applying_ models instead of _using_ models. It is an easy one word change that (to me at least) emphasizes the choice points of: (a) selecting the model; (b) selecting parameters; (c) interpretation. - All models (by definition) are unrealistic in some way. If a model operates at a useful level of abstraction, inaccuracies at lower levels may be acceptable. In fact, such inaccuracies may be the key to making the model tractable and efficient.