Comment on Lars Syll on ‘Michael Woodford on models’
Blog-Reference and Blog-Reference Aug 14
Lars Syll argues against Michael Woodford: “This is — sad to say — a rather typical view among mainstream economists today. Defending the use of unrealistic and unsubstantiated models with the argument that models make it ‘easy for others to see what assumptions have been relied upon, and hence to challenge them’ is rather far-fetched.”
Yes, “unrealistic and unsubstantiated models” are indefensible. Yes, mainstream economics is proto-scientific garbage. Yes, mainstreamer are in the “story-telling business”.#1
Yes, yes, yes. All this is known for 150+ years. Yes, economics is failed/fake science. Yes, economists are stupid or corrupt or both. Yes, this applies in equal measure to Orthodoxy and Heterodoxy. It applies to economics in general and to Lars Syll, in particular.#2
The most important thing to realize is that there are theoretical economics and political economics. Theoretical economics (= science) had been hijacked from the very beginning by political economists (= agenda pushers). Political economics has produced NOTHING of scientific value in the last 200+ years. Economic policy NEVER has had sound scientific foundations.
Both orthodox and heterodox economists are NOT scientists but clowns and useful idiots in the political Circus Maximus.#3, #4
The representative economist does not understand to this day what science is all about. So, here are eleven plain facts about ‘economic sciences’
1. Science manifests itself in the form of the true theory. 2. Truth is well-defined by material and formal consistency. 3. Logical consistency is secured by applying the axiomatic-deductive method and material consistency is secured by applying state-of-the-art testing. 4. The true theory/model is the humanly best mental representation of reality. 5. “When the premises are certain, true, and primary, and the conclusion formally follows from them, this is demonstration, and produces scientific knowledge of a thing.” (Aristotle, 300 BC) 6. The main approaches ― Walrasianism, Keynesianism, Marxianism, Austrianism, MMT ― are mutually contradictory, axiomatically false, materially/formally inconsistent and all got the foundational economic concept of profit wrong. 7. Because the foundations are false the analytical superstructure is false. 8. Economists are too stupid for elementary algebra. 9. Both orthodox and heterodox economics is failed/fake science. 10. Economic policy has no sound scientific foundations. 11. The EconNobel for ‘economic sciences’ is a fraud.
And this is the cause of the mess: economists have since the founding fathers consistently violated the separation of science and politics. In hashtags
#LawOfTheExcludedMiddle
#TheScientistIsNoActivist
#TheActivistIsNoScientist
#PoliticsCorruptsScience.
All this is known and needs no repetition. The consequence is: Economics and economists go directly to the Flat-Earth-Cemetery.
What next? Craig thinks he has a brilliant idea: “Paradigms, especially extremely relevant and urgently needed new paradigms are everything.” Yes, this is also known for a long time: “There is another alternative: to formulate a completely new research program and conceptual approach. As we have seen, this is often spoken of, but there is still no indication of what it might mean.” (Ingrao et al. 1990)
Except that the Paradigm Shift from provably false Walrasian microfoundations and provably false Keynesian macrofoundations to true macrofoundations is an accomplished fact.#5
And now, Lars Syll and all the other agenda-pushers/activists lead your own funeral cortege!
Egmont Kakarot-Handtke
#2 Lars Syll is refuted on all counts. See blog query for details
#5 Sovereign Economics BoD
Related 'Separation of politics and economics'.
***
Wikimedia AXEC136g
