2 ms·

I skimmed the whole paper and expected to see some math. There were no equations. While it's possible to have a real model with no math, it's a lot less likely

I skimmed the whole paper and expected to see some math. There were no equations. While it's possible to have a real model with no math, it's a lot less likely that that's true, and my first inclination is to believe that this has not been rigorously thought through.

anigbrowl 14y ago
The purpose of the paper is to sketch out a field of investigation for social studies by observing cases which contradict the conventional wisdom in that field, as opposed to a rigorous or complete quantitative analysis. I'm sorry if I oversold it by stating why I considered it significant. I don't think rigor necessitates the use of equations. Ronald Coase's nobel-winning contributions to the field of economics are almost wholly conceptual and devoid of math; at the opposite extreme, over-reliance on Li's Gaussian Copula proved unwise for Wall Street (http://www.wired.com/techbiz/it/magazine/17-03/wp_quant?currentPage=all http://www.wired.com/techbiz/it/magazine/17-03/wp_quant?curr...).