# Don't be shy, go ahead and tell us what you think.
···
#
# Give it your best shot.
And I agree with you that one should use a baby-strainer on the bathwater.
# What if there is a shark loose in the bath?
#
# Is it time to put more blood in the water?
#
# Or are we having enough fun as it is?
One reason is that many things done by businessmen are done _because_ they have read economics and believe what economists have said.
# One of the unexpected thing I am finding out is how much genuine respect
# you really have for the capcity of economists to fool nearly everyone
# but your's truely. I never would have expected that you actually do hold
# econmists in such high regard.
Why else would any company think it is just as useful to increase productivity by laying off workers as it is by increasing the efficiency of existing workers and lowering prices?
# Yes, except for the evil influence of the graduates of the Imps Institute,
# business people and labor would be as they say ashole buddies. My spelling
# is really terrible.
As to equilibrium in the economic system, I would agree that it is not to
be expected in an economic system defined as it is today,
# You would probably find Kornae's _Anti-Equilibrium_ really interesting.
but it is most
certainly to be expected if control systems are in charge of it,
# Are you sure of this?
#
# Isn't what is going on currently on the CSGnet the result of the
# interaction of control systems?
#
# In your view do the results obtained thus far provide any confidence that
# it would be possible to manage as much as a dog pound with any
# confidence?
as I think
they are. A control system acts until its controlled variables approach its
reference levels, and then it maintains them there.
# I wonder why Bill feels it neccesary to introduce this innovation into
# the discussion at this point?
Of course there can be
out-of-equilibrium conditions, but there is always a very strong tendency
to restore equilibrium, though as Kent McClelland showed for conflict
situations, the equilibrium may not be a condition of zero error and zero
effort.
# Nor, anywhere close to equilibrium. But the question might be asked
# equilibrium of what? An ant crushed by a steam roller might be said
# to be in a state of equilibrium, but so what?
I particularly liked what you said about foundations and superstructure. A
nice thing about physics is that it does have foundations, and anyone
familiar with them can reconstruct the reasoning that leads to its major
conclusions -- it makes no difference whether that person is a famous
physicist or a portrait painter. You don't go around citing authorities or
commentators to support the idea that electrons are deflected by magnetic
fields, or that angular momentum is conserved, or that entropy increases.
# Now I see the error I made in my last seminar presentation when I said,
# " _a la_ Powers, we can say this concisely as "Behavior is the control of
# perception." Next time I will mend my ways and quote Bruce Gregory who
# said, what I think may be a more useful way of expressing this insight,
# and a more concise statement as well, that "Behavior is controllling."
Any book that shows how these ideas are arrived at will do -- it's the
ideas that matter, not who said them (though it's nice to give credit to
the first guy to propose an idea).
# Don't worry, We will remember you with fondness, and cite you frequently.
If it's necessary to amass a lot of quotations in support of an idea, the
idea must be sorely in need of support -- and it won't get it, that way.
# The experience of the Imps has refuted this misconception. See Lewis
# Carrol, "The Hunting of the Snark." I said it once, I said it twice,
# I said it thrice-- Tis True." Can someone supply a citation for the
# paper that examined the percieved truth value of a position with the
# number of times a subject had been exposed to the argument? I'll try
# to look it up later when I've got more time.
In
a field that has real foundations,
# Economics, unfortunately, is not one of those fields where the foundations
# have been laid. This makes it exciting. Sometimes you get to fly by the seat
# of your pants, and sometimes you get your ass kicked. Sometimes you get to
# experience both on the same day.
authorities are simply not cited, except
in histories or to provide references to data and methods.
# You are assuming a context in which the discussants a can be assumed
# to already familiar with the literature, and the methods.
#
# Where people are determined "know nothings" and blame the "credentialize
# experts for "withholding information" I wouldn't want to be held at fault--
# for disclosing where the secrets have been revealed. Since you everyday
# display more and more evidence that you could benefit from an elementary
# course in econmics, what is a poor imp to do?
But in a field
that's mostly superstructure, authority and consensus are everything, for
there is no way independently to prove or verify any idea.
# The common folk have this institution for resolving issues that generate
# a lot of hot air. It is called a "bet."
I think it's possible to start over in economics just as in psychology,
# Maybe so, but you aren't the guy to do it. If you were the two decades that
# you spent trying would have generated some ideas that would appeal to a
# a wider circle than just Rick.
by
trying to establish basic relationships and facts that don't depend on who
said they exist,
# Aside from Bill Powers.
but which anyone can verify.
# Your notions regarding the philosophy of science are not exactly ones
# that are regarded as up-to-date. Now, people don't say "verify" they
# say the more cautious, "does not refute, or does not falsify.
This is like moving from
Catholicism, where the priesthood is interposed between Man and God, to
Protestant religions in which each individual has his own link to God's
URL.
# Remember, however that, I am to be, at least in formal situations,
# referred to as "the Almighty."
Of course in science, belief is supposed to have less influence than
in religion, or that is the ideal.
# Aren't you fortunate that just by chance you happened to be the son of
# a man who had the most profound insights into ecnomic phenomena. Too bad
# that the world is so wicked his work hasn't gotten a fair hearing. However,
# remember that you are alone in suffering because you are God's son.
In a true science, as I think of such
things, any individual who thinks straight and learns the basics can arrive
at (temporarily) correct conclusions without any permission from anyone
else,
# I think you are really finally catching on. "Learning in the basics."
#
# Do you think we could schedule some time tommorw. We could start with
# the basic facts regarding the structure of a transaction. Followed by
# some of the Imp's magic called "reinforcement" in which you say 5,000
# times "Income equals Expenditure" In a later more advanced course you
# would then move on to an exercise where you say, "Savings equals
# investment." I would have to resort to expodential notation to express
# the number of times you repeat this.
at (temporarily) correct conclusions without any permission from anyone
else,
# I think your parents may have been what is called "overcontrolling."
#
# You seem to think those around you expect you to "Ask first." However,
# to set your ming at ease, I will swear to the following,
#
# I hereby by virtue of the authority granted to me by the provost of the
# Imps Institute grant William T. Powers a limited permission to arrive
# at temporarily correct conclusions in the field of macro economic theory.
# This authorization is extended by the Power vested in me by the chief Imp # himself John Maynard Keynes.
and without having to memorize who said which about what.
# There is, however, a less restrictive clause that should be observed.
#
# Just as long as you can remember what you yourself said yesterday.
The most
boring thing about economists
# This is another thing that we learn in the Imp's Institute in the
# capstone seminar. And, that is how to lull outsiders into a deep
# sleep by saying things like, "...on the other hand..." or "in
# the long-run" or, well you get the idea. Actually, however, when
# you use these carefully tested phrases, and the magical methods of
# behaviorism, they never get it. And, that is how we keep the ideas
# safe from meddleing by outsiders and being buggered up. It is
# undoubtedly safter to keep such dangerous things safely confined
# to books and hidden away in libraries.
is the way they offer endless clever
quotations from famous people
# But, don't forget the really stupid things said by people no one ever
# heard of. The French molecular biologist Jack Monod was famous for
# quoting obscure statements by his Scotts grandfather. Bill himself
# has established something of a reputation for quoting his father
# Trevor C. Powers. Getting into the spirit of things, I will quote my
# father, who said. "If you're not a pilot, you ain't shit."
as if expecting that everyone who reads them
will understand them the same way and also agree with them -- and without a
shred of evidence that what the clever authority said is true.
# The methodology of the Imps is to first shred everything.
# This is why I can't become too upset when Snips chews holes
# in my tires.
#
# By shreding things at random the secrets of the craft can remain safely # hidden in the books, and stored away in the temples called libraries where # they can not possibly ever be found, ever again. Not at least without the
# aid of mentors who have matured, and found enlightenment in the traditions
# of the inner most sactums of the cult.
It's the
same mode of argument I learned as a member of the debating team in high
school.
# Having once learned it why ever did you forget it?
Whoever could cite the most impressive and relevant authorities won.
# You have a problem with this? Or, is it that you are losing, and have
# a problem with most everything right now?
#
# This whole exposition of yours seems marred by a feeling of exasperation.
I do think that an open-minded economist
# Open-mindedness, is typically regarded by Imps as an ill-adviced approach
# to questions that everyone knows have been settled long ago. All that # "Open-mindedness can possibly lead to is new and vicious mistakes.
can contribute greatly to
identifying foundational ideas, and I would be quite willing to learn from
such a person (after my fashion, which requires starting by not believing
anything I am told).
# The sole exception being what daddy told him.
I will continue the search.
# By-the-Way how is Professor Bruun?
#
# I would think that it would be possible to plug control based agents into
# her model, and I hope that this could be done fairly quickly. Is it too
soon for a progress report?
Bill Willialms
