[From Bill Williams 2 Feburary 2004 4:30 PM CSG]
[From Bill Powers (2004.02.02.0701 MST)]
Rick Marken (2004.02.01.1800)--
By the way, the beginning of the year seems to be economics discussion
time on CSGNet. If you go to the CSGNet archives page
(http://listserv.uiuc.edu/wa.cgi?A0=csgnet&D=0&H=0&O=D&T=0) and click
on February 2003, weeks 1 and 2, you will find a nice, substantive
discussion of my H. economicus model and the Testbed (in the "Economics
Blues" thread).
Bill Williams' remarks in that thread are just as irritating and uninformed
as ever -- this is easier to understand now that we know he never read
TCP's book,
# May I make a slight correction. You have no idea whether I read TCP's book
# or not. All that you "know" is that I told you that I didn't read it. Have
# you by chance considered that I imps have been trained to create set-ups.
# I set-up is what you do so that that an innocent victim will wander down a
# path so that they are easy prey for a waiting imp. When they pounce upon
# their unwarry victim the shout, "gotcha" and laugh so hard, their victims
# sometimes get away.
but has based all his comments on his memories of one
conversation with TCP after reading a pre-pre-publication manuscript (many
years before publication).
# That was enough to serve for may years. That and the magic of behaviorism.
# All it takes in a semi-serious expression, combined with an air of
# thoughtfullness. The victims can not help themselves from talking endlessly.
# Only years later do they remember that, they have been diverted from the # secrets which they were in search of have remained hidden.
Many of his memories are faulty,
# This is another of the imps tricks. The victim is lured into believing that
# the imp, if the imp in fact ever actually knew anything at all, has long
# since forgotten it. And, thus the secrets are safe.
in particular
his memory that TCP thought Keynes didn't recognize aggregate entities. It
was certain "neo-Keynesians" who said that the economy was just a family
scaled up -- and anyway, that subject never made it into the published
book. That was in a separate TCP paper (never published) that I sent Bill,
but as usual he garbled the references.
# Maybe Bill Powers is right. I'm getting forgetful. I think I shredded
# this email earlier today. But, you know what, untill I realized that
# I'd covered this one before, I was having just as much fun as I did
# the first time.
One can't help wondering how he has treated the volumes of stuff he has read,
# Sad to say I am pretty hard on books, and what I don't shred, Snips usually
# manages to chew up.
or thinks he has read, in the literature of economics.
I feel like an agent of the ACLU who has been maneuvered into the position
of defending an acknowledged murderer because his human rights have been
violated.
# Was someone unknown to me attacking me? For what?
···
#
# In all seriousness, I do think Bill Powers has a streak of real integrety
# in him in regard to his insistent committment to freespeach.
I thing TCP was wrong about many things and I do not at all buy
his conclusions about "leakage," but it galls me to see his actual
accomplishments
# Lets talk about how distingished a chemist he was. That was an actual
# accomlishment. No one that I know of ever attacked his work in chemistry.
trashed
# Does it really look like I am making an impact?
by a careless
# Imps are trained to look as if they are careless. It lures the unwary
# into irritation, and then into setups for "gotcha."
and opinionated -- and endlessly condescending
# Experience imps never admit defeat.
-- reader.
I have installed Williams and several others on my Earthlink Spam Blocker
list, so I will no longer have to deal with the most hostile fringe of
contributors to CSGnet.
# This is one of Bill Powers trade-mark, "don't fuck any more pigs"
arguemnts. I haven't to my knowledge email Powers in some years. But,
I note that Powers has extended his cosmology to include the category
"hostile contributors" to CSGnet. Under this new dispensation, I think
I have a secure status on the CSGnet as a "hostile" rather than a
non-contributor. However, lets not forget my according to Bill Powers
"brilliant" insight into the Buridan's Ass paradox.
Others can make up their own minds about this.
I'm too old to put up with it,
# Actually I think the problem is that you started your effort to
# think about economics way too late. So did your dad. What Rick's
# problem is I am sure I don't know.
#
# I thought a while back what you said was, "Tell me what your really
# think.
and should have realized this long ago.
# I think that there is a good deal of wisdom in this.
By the way, my main objection to H. Economicus is that there are no H's in
it.
# Rick. Pay attention. We don't have Bruce Gregory around to tell us every
# thing is going to have to be repeated, so try and assimlate this the first
# time.
There are two abstract control systems that probably don't exist.
# Except in Rick's florid immagination.
I don't think you really believe that somebody is controlling GNP relative to
a reference level for what it should be. Remember the big mistake I made in
dealing with the rat data that Bruce Abbott obtained. I fit a
control-system model to the data and it worked quite well -- and
immediately afterward, Bruce proved that the effect was actually an
artifact due to food-collection time. You can't conclude that a control
system exists just because you can fit a model to the data.
# Rick, however, unlike the rest of us, doesn't find this sort of thing
# presents any difficulties at all.
Some added information is needed,
# I think so too. Like where is the model?
and you need to rule out other explanations that might be better.
# Rick are you aware that you can buy a copy of Keynes _General Theory
# for a mere $14.95.
Bill Williams