The reputation of Macroeconomics has gotten so bad....

  • Thread starter BWV
  • Start date
In summary: String theory is so impressive, but it's really just a bunch of equations."In summary, Shalizi argues that sociology is a more fundamental and rigorous field of inquiry than string theory, and that the latter is only impressive because of its mathematical sophistication.
  • #1
BWV
1,465
1,781
that now it is being compared to String Theory, becoming 'mathematical pseudoscience'

(Romer just won the Nobel Prize in Economics)

https://crimfi.files.wordpress.com/2016/09/the_trouble_with_macroeconomics.pdf

The evolution of macroeconomics mirrors developments in string theory from physics, which suggests that they are examples of a general failure mode of for fields of science that rely on mathematical theory in which facts can end up being subordinated to the theoretical preferences of revered leaders. The larger concern is that macroeconomic pseudoscience is undermining the norms of science throughout economics. If so, all of the policy domains that economics touches could lose the accumulation of useful knowledge that characteristic of true science, the greatest human invention.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
If you took all the economists in Washington DC and placed them end to end, they still wouldn't reach a conclusion.
 
  • Like
Likes Astronuc, Mondayman and russ_watters
  • #3
"To prove that Wall Street is an early omen of movements still to come in GNP, commentators quote economic studies alleging that market downturns predicted four out of the last five recessions. That is an understatement. Wall Street indexes predicted nine out of the last five recessions! And its mistakes were beauties." ~ Paul Samuelson
 
  • Like
Likes Ryan_m_b
  • #4
Ok but no reasonable person should expect macroeconomics to predict recessions - after all the prediction itself, if believed by enough people, would be sufficient in itself to cause a recession.
 
  • Like
Likes russ_watters
  • #5
Shots fired at both string theory and macroeconomics...that's efficient.
 
  • #6
BWV said:
that now it is being compared to String Theory, becoming 'mathematical pseudoscience'
But still above sociology I guess?
 
  • Like
Likes BWV
  • #7
russ_watters said:
But still above sociology I guess?

Since you brought up sociology, consider the following blog entry from physicist-turned-statistician (and science blogger) Cosma Shalizi from CMU: "On the Superiority of Sociology to String Theory".

http://bactra.org/weblog/445.html

Note his quote about an (physics) adviser of a friend of his who made the following memorable put-downs:

"I could go crazy tomorrow and find an appointment in the sociology department."

"I don't want to criticize you, but this is the way superstring people think."
 
  • Like
Likes Ryan_m_b

Related to The reputation of Macroeconomics has gotten so bad....

What is the current reputation of macroeconomics?

The reputation of macroeconomics has been controversial and polarizing. Some people view it as a highly influential field that shapes economic policies, while others see it as unreliable and irrelevant.

What factors have contributed to the negative reputation of macroeconomics?

There are several factors that have contributed to the negative reputation of macroeconomics. These include the failure of macroeconomic models to predict and prevent major economic crises, the use of complex and abstract mathematical models that are often detached from real-world situations, and the influence of political ideologies and biases on economic theories.

Why is the reputation of macroeconomics important?

The reputation of macroeconomics is important because it affects the credibility and trust in the field. A negative reputation can lead to skepticism and lack of confidence in economic policies and decisions based on macroeconomic theories. It can also discourage young researchers from pursuing a career in macroeconomics, leading to a lack of innovation and progress in the field.

What can be done to improve the reputation of macroeconomics?

To improve the reputation of macroeconomics, there needs to be a shift towards more rigorous and empirical research, rather than solely relying on theoretical models. There should also be more collaboration between economists and other social scientists to incorporate a broader perspective into economic analyses. Additionally, there needs to be more transparency and openness in the field, including acknowledging and addressing the limitations and uncertainties in economic theories and policies.

Is there hope for the future of macroeconomics?

Yes, there is hope for the future of macroeconomics. Despite its challenges and criticisms, macroeconomics continues to evolve and adapt to changing economic landscapes. With concerted efforts to improve research methodologies and promote diversity and inclusivity in the field, the reputation of macroeconomics can be restored and contribute to a better understanding of the complex economic systems.

Similar threads

A Shinichi Mochizuki's ABC Conjecture and Replication Crisis in Maths
    • General Math
Replies
33
Views
5K
Will Superstring Theory Win a Nobel Prize by 2020?
    • Other Physics Topics
Replies
5
Views
3K
Are New Ideas Important in Physics and Astronomy?
    • Astronomy and Astrophysics
Replies
6
Views
3K
So you want to be a scientist in industry
    • STEM Academic Advising
2
Replies
38
Views
24K
“The Demon Haunted World”, by Carl Sagan review
    • Science and Math Textbooks
Replies
5
Views
5K
From Pooh’s first Assessment Report on Climate Change
    • Earth Sciences
Replies
20
Views
6K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top