3 ms·

Why suggest math PhDs unless it's in bad faith? Wouldn't economics and sociology PhDs have both more room for bias in their work, and tend to have power over t

by wisty 1y ago

Why suggest math PhDs unless it's in bad faith? Wouldn't economics and sociology PhDs have both more room for bias in their work, and tend to have power over the economy and society? "Experts" have a lot of sway over the public sector and legal system. The public sector has increased to take up a huge percentage of GDP, and the legal sector has also arguably expanded a lot in power. The perception is that a huge amount of public spending is controlled by the public service, and they tend to defer to academics if the executive keeps them in line.

intended 1y ago
If someone hasn’t done the legwork why should they be in the same arena ? We don’t put NBA professionals in the same league as newbies. Expertise in this case isn’t cheaply earned. It’s the top of a pyramid of intellectual effort.
jaredklewis 1y ago
> Why suggest math PhDs unless it's in bad faith? Maybe because this thread is about a math PhD (Terrence Tao)? I’m also surprised you believe academic economists have much power. These days, most politicians from both parties in the US proudly reject more or less all of mainstream economics. Sometimes, the work of academic economists can have some small influence on decisions at the Fed, so I guess that is something. Sociologists don’t even have that. They’re more or less just talking to themselves.
- wisty 1y ago
  If only politicians mattered why doesn't Trump sack virtually everyone in DC? The government is a large organisation and its middle management is both vast and powerful. And this huge middle management is obliged (arguably) to listen to academia unless otherwise instructed by politicians (who are too few in number and mostly not talented in steering large organisations so much as they are used to just going with the flow and taking the credit).
  - jaredklewis 1y ago
    Do you have some specific examples of this phenomenon you would be willing to share? You seem to feel that academics have a lot of influence in the world, but I am extremely skeptical of this hypothesis. IME academics are generally ignored except when they are saying something we like. Or the corollary: we go find the academic that is saying the thing we like and ignore all the other ones. If we take specifically the field of economics for a moment (since I know a bit about this one), what are examples of "middle managers" sticking to the recommendations of economists? Because it's not hard to make a list of ideas that economists generally love and pretty much everyone else hates: paying organ donors, carbon taxes, land value taxes, charging for public parking, getting rid of minimum parking requirements, allowing surge pricing of various kinds, unilateral free trade, cash transfers instead of in-kind benefits, and abolishing the mortgage interest deduction. Honorable mention to congestion pricing, which economists of course love, but is interesting because support for it actually went up in NYC after implementation; support was pretty low before implementation.
    - wisty 1y ago
      I'm partly just explaining what Trump supporters think. The lump of gdp fallacy in which an urban Cafe is equal to a factory is maybe something I think is an issue? Trump supporters disagree with economists on Carbon taxes, low tarriffs, and immigration. And even economists to some extent pick and choose the issues they push from the less biased body of work they produce.
      - jaredklewis 1y ago
        Ok sure but can you point to even one instance anywhere of the will of politicians being subverted by “middle managers” (as you say) listening to academic economists? It doesn’t happen because no one listens to academics. I’m confronting your assertion that academics have power in our society and you haven’t put forward any arguments that they do
teiferer 1y ago
Please take a moment and consider what exactly you responded to and how. I'm pointing you out specifically since you seem to be familiar with the concepts of good faith vs bad faith arguments. The post you responded to asked about a specific aspect, namely political power, of math PhDs. Your response was to state that surely other PhDs have bias in their work. Are you not realizing that that's quite obviously a bad faith argument? Somebody claims that A has B and your respond that C had D, insinuating GP made connections between A and D or C and B. They didn't. It's quite common to argue like that, but you did throw around the "bad faith" term. You need to measure your own behavior by that standard when accusing others.

by wisty 1y ago

intended 1y ago

If someone hasn’t done the legwork why should they be in the same arena ? We don’t put NBA professionals in the same league as newbies. Expertise in this case isn’t cheaply earned. It’s the top of a pyramid of intellectual effort.

jaredklewis 1y ago

> Why suggest math PhDs unless it's in bad faith? Maybe because this thread is about a math PhD (Terrence Tao)? I’m also surprised you believe academic economists have much power. These days, most politicians from both parties in the US proudly reject more or less all of mainstream economics. Sometimes, the work of academic economists can have some small influence on decisions at the Fed, so I guess that is something. Sociologists don’t even have that. They’re more or less just talking to themselves.

wisty 1y ago
If only politicians mattered why doesn't Trump sack virtually everyone in DC? The government is a large organisation and its middle management is both vast and powerful. And this huge middle management is obliged (arguably) to listen to academia unless otherwise instructed by politicians (who are too few in number and mostly not talented in steering large organisations so much as they are used to just going with the flow and taking the credit).
- jaredklewis 1y ago
  Do you have some specific examples of this phenomenon you would be willing to share? You seem to feel that academics have a lot of influence in the world, but I am extremely skeptical of this hypothesis. IME academics are generally ignored except when they are saying something we like. Or the corollary: we go find the academic that is saying the thing we like and ignore all the other ones. If we take specifically the field of economics for a moment (since I know a bit about this one), what are examples of "middle managers" sticking to the recommendations of economists? Because it's not hard to make a list of ideas that economists generally love and pretty much everyone else hates: paying organ donors, carbon taxes, land value taxes, charging for public parking, getting rid of minimum parking requirements, allowing surge pricing of various kinds, unilateral free trade, cash transfers instead of in-kind benefits, and abolishing the mortgage interest deduction. Honorable mention to congestion pricing, which economists of course love, but is interesting because support for it actually went up in NYC after implementation; support was pretty low before implementation.
  - wisty 1y ago
    I'm partly just explaining what Trump supporters think. The lump of gdp fallacy in which an urban Cafe is equal to a factory is maybe something I think is an issue? Trump supporters disagree with economists on Carbon taxes, low tarriffs, and immigration. And even economists to some extent pick and choose the issues they push from the less biased body of work they produce.
    - jaredklewis 1y ago
      Ok sure but can you point to even one instance anywhere of the will of politicians being subverted by “middle managers” (as you say) listening to academic economists? It doesn’t happen because no one listens to academics. I’m confronting your assertion that academics have power in our society and you haven’t put forward any arguments that they do

teiferer 1y ago

Please take a moment and consider what exactly you responded to and how. I'm pointing you out specifically since you seem to be familiar with the concepts of good faith vs bad faith arguments. The post you responded to asked about a specific aspect, namely political power, of math PhDs. Your response was to state that surely other PhDs have bias in their work. Are you not realizing that that's quite obviously a bad faith argument? Somebody claims that A has B and your respond that C had D, insinuating GP made connections between A and D or C and B. They didn't. It's quite common to argue like that, but you did throw around the "bad faith" term. You need to measure your own behavior by that standard when accusing others.