5 ms·
But that's a gross mischaracterization of Austrian economics. It's nothing like the 'string theory' of economics and is indeed rather simple. All the seminal w
by jwallaceparker 13y ago
But that's a gross mischaracterization of Austrian economics. It's nothing like the 'string theory' of economics and is indeed rather simple.
All the seminal works (especially "Economics in One Lesson") are very elementary. You need no prior exposure to economics.
They say you can identify an Austrian work by flipping through it, as it will undoubtedly contain no graphs or formulas.
- wutbrodo 13y agoThe only goal of the comparison to string theory was that it's an alternative theory that an educated observer should judge on its own merits. I'm saying that the background of one's introduction to economics should be based in the mainstream, just as one's intro to physics should not be based in mainstream physics vs string theory (saying nothing of how advanced the intro curriculum need be). My fundamental point is that alternative theories are invaluable and essential, but being conservative and sticking with the mainstream is generally well-advised for beginners. Once you're confident in your grounding in the mainstream, you can approach alternatives with a critical, well-informed eye.
- drcode 13y agoAstrology has no formulas. Astronomy has lots of formulas. Whether you prefer Austrian or Keynsian approaches, FORMULAS ARE A GOOD THING.