Good Article Past Times J.W. Mason

J.W. Mason has a skilful article on mainstream economical theory "I Don't See Any Method At All." The declaration is that it is a fault to assume that mainstream economical theory has anything to create amongst the economic scheme of the existent world. This article is quite brief; I may expand on my comments close "economics mathematics" later.


I similar this description:

Economic theory is essentially shut formal system; it’s a historical accident that in that place is roughly overlap betwixt its technical vocabulary as well as the linguistic communication used to depict concrete economical phenomena. Economics the dependent is to the economic scheme the sphere of social reality every bit chess theory is to medieval history: The statement, say, that “queens are most effective when supported past times potent bishops” powerfulness live on reasonable inwards both domains, only studying its application inwards the i representative volition non attention at all inwards applying it inwards in the other. 

It should live on noted that "mainstream economics" covers a broad expanse of research, as well as roughly of it is empirical inwards nature. That empirical function is a mixed bag; inwards roughly cases good, inwards others, obvious mistakes are made. The varying character of the output powerfulness live on understood every bit the resultant of the fact that in that place is no useful theory guiding how to apply statistical techniques; if y'all apply statistical tests at random to randomly chosen sets of data, y'all cannot hold off consistent character of results.

However, J.W. Mason is to a greater extent than generous than I am amongst regards to the character of the analysis of the shut formal systems inside mainstream economics.

I ask:

• How is possible that mainstream economists cannot trivially create upwards one's hear whether raising the involvement charge per unit of measurement raises or lowers the charge per unit of measurement of inflation (the "neo-Ricardian debate")? I stimulate got never seen command arrangement engineers debating the lawsuit of changing a command input; they would aspect at a model output.
• Since representative identify optimisations were supposed to live on taken over all trajectories (a global optimum), how is possible that the "zero lower bound" lawsuit was exclusively "discovered" past times creating novel models to capture this effect?
• How is it possible that a mathematical theory that says that the cost score is completely determined past times financial policy (the Fiscal Theory of the Price Level) tin post away coexist amongst the residue of DSGE macro, which says that key depository financial establishment policy determines everything? After all, it should live on possible to prove one wrong.

(Before whatsoever i complains, those are rhetorical questions. I know what the criterion excuses responses to those questions are; however, they are to role the technical mathematics term, "lame." I am non interested inwards writing a 3000 give-and-take article on the topic correct now.)

In whatsoever event, using J.W. Mason's analogy, I am interested inwards medieval history, non chess theory. There is no betoken studying a formal theory that is railroad train downwardly inwards largely unintelligible fashion (if non mathematically incoherent), if it tells us cypher close the existent world. This explains why I stimulate got given upwards looking at DSGE macro results.

(c) Brian Romanchuk 2016