Does anyone have access to a copy of Krugman's Three/Two Cheers for Formalism. I have very limited and capped access to the internet using a mobile stick device, here in South Africa. I don't need it that desperately. Simply recall that he has made several references, at different times, to how scholarship is unscientific (my word) if it does not include mathematical formalism. I think (if memory serves), he even criticised Stephen Jay Gould - not sure.
I read this in the context of his bitch and moan in "Pop Internationalism" - which has some merit - and his defence of Child/Cheap Labour in which he says that people had not right to moral outrage. If only they thought long and hard enough they would agree with him. As Oakshott observed, a rationalist has great difficulty believing that anyone could think honestly and long and hard enough and disagree with them.
Setting aside his achievements in Economics, he seems like quite a self-righteous person. I had great difficulty convincing people that Krugman's screeds against George W Bush were insufficient reason to deify him (Krugman), as Bush was the easiest of targets. Whereas Stiglitz tends to make room for differing perspectives and approaches, Krugman seems downright offended when people can't/won't see HIS point.
On a Hobbesian note: People are quite capable of acknowledging that others can be intelligent. They believe, nonetheless, that theirs is the better intellgence and that they know best.
Ismail Lagardien
Nihil humani a me alienum puto
________________________________ From: Indian Jones <lburgindianjones at gmail.com> To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org Sent: Tuesday, 23 August 2011, 8:36 Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] Mathematics and Formalism in Economics
This was amusing:
"When historians of science look back on the late twentieth century in economics I suspect they will view macroeconomists' preoccupation with the "correct" speci?cation of expectations something like the medieval effort to ?nd philosophers' stones or the Holy Grail."
It would probably be worse. Self-referentiality and games of estimation are euphemisms to hide the fabrication of "incorrect" expectations to be punished. These incorrect expectations were garnished with the imprimatur of mathematical formalism whose false credibility were part of the estimation game. Krugman's exculpatory diagnosis of "bemusement with mathematical beauty" conceals befuddlement via mathematical rigor, a very useful step in the manufacture of expectation.
This professional crime is beyond negligence.
Mike Beggs wrote:
> By the way, for those who prefer the written paper to the YouTube,
> it's here:
>
> http://ineteconomics.org/sites/inet.civicactions.net/files/INET%20C%40K%20Paper%20Session%206%20-%20Foley.pdf
___________________________________ http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk