spikels, The authors most likely see your point (and hear it all the time), but I'm not sure if you see their arguments and perspective. Yes, philosophy can be

spikels, The authors most likely see your point (and hear it all the time), but I'm not sure if you see their arguments and perspective. Yes, philosophy can be less than useful at times. But sometimes it simply doesn't get credit because other disciplines borrow its ideas, simplify them, and use them on a day-to-day basis. In doing so, other fields often create orthodoxies (e.g. practices where certain beliefs are so baked in that you don't think about them). That's fine for getting stuff done, but it can be dangerous when the ideas really aren't resting on bedrock and need reexamination from time to time. The key point of the paper, as I see it, is to talk about why the field of economics is missing the boat on simulation.