Noticing Your Bias

[The_Late_Andrew_Ryan]

@Caley McKibbin

@Student

I am not saying Austrian Economics doesn’t do that, but I am saying that you won’t truly know that for yourself until you have extensively studied economics as a whole (both mainstream and heterodox) and looked outside your window enough to make an informed decision about which “school” makes the most sense.

This is a case of being so open minded that your brain falls out. The first step in promoting crazy ideas is always using nihilism to make people discard pesky things like the senses and reason that get in the way. You being a standard Keynesian pretending to be impartial here almost seems like that.

Maybe you have some cynical hypothesis stowed away in the back of your mind about why the street to AE seems so one-way among all ages.

I sense… I sense a disturbance… What could it be? A premonition! Of what? Oh what could I be sensing could it be… OMG!!! Flamewar!!! Everybody down!!!

I hope that we can handle the oncoming fire maturly…

[Caley_McKibbin]

No flame. I have better things to do than steam at people on the internet. It just seems deceptive when he pretends neutrality toward AE. His suggestions might be coloured more often than you think.

[thelion]

@Metus

@thelion

Merely: (a) formal logic, (b) discrete math (Karl Menger, the younger, argued that in fact Austrian verbal arguments can all be stated via math, and are in fact even more general hence powerful than most ad hoc partial derivative constructions,which require a continuous function of quantity). Ken Arrow’s monograph against Samuelson also reinforces this.

Could you link an attempt to formalize Austrian Economics? I am very interested in formal systems, since mathematics is such a powerful science since the introduction of those. Maybe Austrian Economics can become even more powerful with this.

Arrow broke Samuelson’s intratransitive preference socialism via http://cowles.econ.yale.edu/P/cm/m12-2/index.htm. Chapter VI.

But Arrow is not notably an Austrian Economist (he’s published in a collection of essays dedicated to Carl Menger, and is apparently familiar with some facts, but as far as I know he did not continue it up after the eighties).

See also Roger Garrison’s Time and Money.

There have not been any systematic attempts to express Austrian Economics in a modern formal logical system. I think its possible, however. That what I’m working on right now, starting with the uncertain expected profit in the theory of competition.The system has to be recursive and non-deterministic.

Markov chains have been tried, but they are not good at modeling purposive yet unexpected states of the system. But there are plenty of mathematical tools to work with besides that which haven’t been applied at all!

[zefreak]

You guys should check out some of Barkley Rosser’s work.

[Esuric]

@Student

Besides, how can you be so sure Austrians are right anyways? Because what they say sounds like common sense

Don’t confuse common sense with logic. Austrians, for example, show that over-consumption causes recessions–this appears counter-intuitive, but it’s entirely logical.

@Student

Personally, I don’t think you should even both about picking an “school of thought” until you are close to 30 and have conducted some economics research of your own. But maybe I am being ageist.

This is pure nonsense.

@Student

Economics is a science, not a faith or a political movement.

Agreed.

@Jeremiah Dyke

The majority of the political/economics material I read comes from mises.org

I’ve noticed that I am developing quite a bias for anyone outside the circle of Austrian Economics (which is not scientific in the slightest). If I hear someone refer to an individual from another school of thought I probably, though I don’t want to, assume they are in error and given only cursory listen to their message. Do you think this is just a function of reading too much within a small sect?

This is your problem. It has nothing to do with Austrian economics.

[thelion]

@zefreak

You guys should check out some of Barkley Rosser’s work.

Just added his works to my reading list! Looks interesting.

Thanks!

[Dondoolee]

Try to find ways to enjoy “the other side”. Remember most scholars / scientists / artists are not evil, try to enjoy what they have to offer, and try to see things on their terms. And it is usually best, to quote Lewis Carrol, “Begin at the beginning and when you get to the end stop”. Try to find out “the basics” and 101’s of a subject before “taking sides”. In my experience, drawing thick lines when they are not absolutely needed takes so much enjoyment out of life. And to approach a subject with a negative / hyper critical mindset is counter productive and takes the joy out of learning.

[Amanojack]

It can be really fun to read an intelligent and cogent critique of libertarianism or AE, because you can see how perfect their logic is except at this one point, or except for this one unwarranted assumption. Once you identify the oversight(s) you can see how it colors everything the person writes, and how they have to contort their theory to explain away the contradictions that result from the error. You can then predict further errors they will make, and so on, until it is utterly clear that they’ve got it wrong.

Almost always, though, a very intelligent critic will raise points that force you to re-examine your position, inevitably coming out of it with a stronger and more complete understanding of your original position (or perhaps a new position).