Great article on how the economics profession uses mathematical models to justify itself, despite the profession's repeated failures to accurately predict the simplest of empirical realities. I'm reminded of the
math used to justify the neo-Piagetian model of hierarchical complexity
(MHC), which model was used to justify Wilber's integral model. A lot
of empirical, neuroscientic research since Piaget has proven some of his
basic theses to be wrong. And yet the MHC continues to proceed with a
mathematical model that is divorced from those empirical realities.
They
even refuse to look at cognitive science developments like Where
Mathematics Comes From, which investigates the neuroscientific biases of
mathematical models, because their sacred math is a direct access into a
metaphysical, Platonic reality. Like in the article they hold on to an
outdated astrological model, a worldview that refuses to acknowledge
updates in empirical science: The Cult of the Metaphysical Mathematical
Models.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.