Paul Samuelson claimed that the “ergodic hypothesis” is essential for advancing economics from the realm of history to the realm of science.
But is it really tenable to assume – as Samuelson and most other neoclassical economists – that ergodicity is essential to economics?
The answer can only be – as I have argued here, here, here, here and here – NO WAY!Lars P. Syll's Blog
Ergodicity – the biggest mistake ever made in economics
Lars P. Syll | Professor of Economics, Malmo University
See also Mauboussin on Strategy: Shaking the Foundation: An interview with Ole Peters challenges some of the foundational assumptions in economics and finance, Legg Mason Capital Management, and Towers Watson: The Irreversibility of Time: Or Why You Should Not Listen To Financial Economists
(hat tip Rick Bookstaber)
See also Paul Davidson: Is economics a science? Should economics be rigorous?
No comments:
Post a Comment