Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
It is bad enough that the field of psychology has for so long been a non-social science, viewing the motive forces of personality as deriving from internal psychic experiences rather than from man's interaction with his social setting.

mmmmmmmmmmm, no. The premises of psychology, entombed in The Literature, are "man's interaction with his social setting." Behavior is the expression of internalized experiences with a "social setting," the relation of one's self to the other. More accurate are retrospective observations of research bias that acknowledge the antipathy of latter day psychologists toward ideologic pathologies arising from abject institutional "engineering", so to isolate autogenetic mental defect in the individual.

Similarly in the field of economics: since its "utilitarian" revolution about a century ago, this discipline has also abandoned its analysis of the objective world and its political, economic productive relations in favor of more introverted, utilitarian and welfare-oriented norms. Moral speculations concerning mathematical psychics have come to displace the once-social science of political economy. Read more ...


Diversity is the key to economic and political evolution.
by Cat on Mon Dec 14th, 2009 at 12:55:55 PM EST
That article was written in 1970. So, what it says was already known 40 years ago but it didn't matter, Neoclassical Economics reigned since then... Sometimes I despair.

En un viejo país ineficiente, algo así como España entre dos guerras civiles, poseer una casa y poca hacienda y memoria ninguna. -- Gil de Biedma
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Dec 14th, 2009 at 01:04:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Mig
That article was written in 1970.

Which article was "that"?

"It is not necessary to have hope in order to persevere."
by ARGeezer (ARGeezer a in a circle eurotrib daught com) on Mon Dec 14th, 2009 at 02:52:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Michael Hudson on Paul Samuelson.

En un viejo país ineficiente, algo así como España entre dos guerras civiles, poseer una casa y poca hacienda y memoria ninguna. -- Gil de Biedma
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Dec 14th, 2009 at 04:23:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Thanks, I hadn't read the intro paragraph in italics, as I saw the first paragraph was what had been quoted. You are right. And Hudson was right then and is now. My bad.

I am also glad I successfully resisted characterizing Samuelson by inserting what would have been the third word of the title, although my fingers are gnawed as a result. It would have been uncivil and disrespectful.

"It is not necessary to have hope in order to persevere."

by ARGeezer (ARGeezer a in a circle eurotrib daught com) on Mon Dec 14th, 2009 at 05:55:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]
If you cannot find it --will-- in yourself to refuse, turn away from that which you cannot do. Look here.

100,000 people marched in Copenhagen from the Danish Parliament to just outside the Bella Center, the site of the UN climate change conference.

The world-renowned Indian environmental leader and thinker Vandana Shiva spoke before thousands at Saturday's protest in Copenhagen.

Pull up your delegates KATE HORNER: So, ministers are--right now we have delegations here. These are negotiators. These are often technocrats who are coming here to lobby on behalf of their countries. Ministers, who are going to come on the weekend, are going to have to engage on some of the political questions...

We know of a couple of examples already. In Barcelona, the Algerian delegate led the African Group in a very strong demand to focus the negotiations on emissions reductions, what's at the heart of this, and he was lambasted. And we don't know exactly what happened; this is all speculation on my part. But he was called home halfway through the meeting, because one of his family members was sick. What we hear is that he was under pressure, that there were European capitals calling home and asking them to rein in their delegates.

We also know that another strong negotiator, who speaks--who formerly spoke on behalf of the Philippines, was kicked off the delegation. She is one of the lead voices of developing countries in trying to secure a just and equitable outcome. And we see that she's come under pressure and has been kicked off. It's kind of amazing, but these are the tactics that we see.

One of the things that I think has been incredible--I know that you reported earlier on African civil society demanding more aggressive targets earlier this week. One of the things that they said is that they intend to stand boldly behind those countries that are supporting the strong demands of Africa, and they will not accept any of these kind of pressure tactics. So they're really acting very strongly to support their delegates, which is a great thing.

Tuvalu Interrupts Copenhagen Summit: "So we are saying, as the Tck Tck Tck campaign and Greenpeace, that it's not over until it's over. And, in fact, you know the phrase when you say, "It ain't over until the fat lady sings"? We are saying it ain't over 'til the thin man from the United States sings--President Obama--because he has the power to make the difference here. And so, basically the real issue here is about the legally binding, because basically all these small developing countries and citizens across the world know from UN summits that if you don't get a binding treaty, no implementation takes place. And this is one summit we have to have a real road map that has specific benchmarks and targets and that is binding, because time is running out very, very fast for the planet.So we are saying, as the Tck Tck Tck campaign and Greenpeace, that it's not over until it's over. And, in fact, you know the phrase when you say, "It ain't over until the fat lady sings"? We are saying it ain't over 'til the thin man from the United States sings--President Obama--because he has the power to make the difference here. And so, basically the real issue here is about the legally binding, because basically all these small developing countries and citizens across the world know from UN summits that if you don't get a binding treaty, no implementation takes place. And this is one summit we have to have a real road map that has specific benchmarks and targets and that is binding, because time is running out very, very fast for the planet."
Developing nations end Copenhagen "boycott". "The summit was suspended briefly after G77-China bloc, made up of 130 nations, staged a walkout over what it called a violation of the democratic process by the Danish hosts, but the summit resumed Monday afternoon after delegates from the bloc returned, the BBC reported.

::

Some people will not roll. Fuck your dispair. Solidarność!

Diversity is the key to economic and political evolution.

by Cat on Mon Dec 14th, 2009 at 03:02:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Michael Hudson: The Problem with Paul Samuelson
The Swedish Royal Academy has therefore involved itself in a number of inconsistencies in choosing Mr. Samuelson to receive the 1970 Economics Prize. For one thing, last year's prize was awarded to two mathematical economists (Jan Tinbergen of Holland and Ragnar Frisch of Norway) for their translation of other men's economic theories into mathematical language, and in their statistical testing of existing economic theory. This year's prize, by contrast, was awarded to a man whose theoretical contribution is essentially untestable by the very nature of its "pure" assumptions, which are far too static ever to have the world stop its dynamic evolution so that they may be "tested." (This prompted one of my colleagues to suggest that the next Economics Prize be awarded to anyone capable of empirically testing any of Mr. Samuelson's theorems.)

And precisely because economic "science" seems to be more akin to "political science" than to natural science, the Economics Prize seems closer to the Peace Prize than to the prize in chemistry. Deliberately or not, it represents the Royal Swedish Academy's endorsement or recognition of the political influence of some economist in helping to defend some (presumptively) laudable government policy. Could the prize therefore be given just as readily to a U.S. president, central banker or some other non-academician as to a "pure" theorist (if such exists)? Could it just as well be granted to David Rockefeller for taking the lead in lowering the prime rate, or President Nixon for his acknowledged role in guiding the world's largest economy, or to Arthur Burns as chairman of the Federal Reserve Board? If the issue is ultimately one of government policy, the answer would seem to be affirmative.

Or is popularity perhaps to become the major criterion for winning the prize? This year's award must have been granted at least partially in recognition of Mr. Samuelson's Economics textbook, which has sold over two million copies since 1947 and thereby influenced the minds of a whole generation of -- let us say it, for it is certainly not all Mr. Samuelson's fault -- old fogeys. The book's orientation itself has impelled students away from further study of the subject rather than attracting them to it. And yet if popularity and success in the marketplace of economic fads (among those who have chosen to remain in the discipline rather than seeking richer intellectual pastures elsewhere) is to become a consideration, then the prize committee has done an injustice to Jacqueline Susann in not awarding her this year's literary prize.



En un viejo país ineficiente, algo así como España entre dos guerras civiles, poseer una casa y poca hacienda y memoria ninguna. -- Gil de Biedma
by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Dec 14th, 2009 at 01:06:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Richard Murphy is a UK tax accountant who advises the TUC. From his Tax Research UK blog:


Paul Samuelson has died. A Nobel laureate economist he has a lot to answer for, and his legacy (eulogised in the FT by the BBC's Stephanie Flanders) is pretty dire.

He, more than most mathematised economics. Which means he had to assume people were rational. In the process he broke the link between economics and reality.

Then he assumed the existence of stable equilibria in an economy - which is contrary to all known evidence. So once more he remeoved economics from the realms of usefulness.

And he wrote a textbook that has created more bad economists dedicated to harming the society in which they live than almost any other.

So what he got a Nobel prize? His legacy is dire.

by yacker on Tue Dec 15th, 2009 at 06:42:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Occasional Series