经济模型的类比,第三版

I. Gilboa, Andrew Postlewaite, L. Samuelson, D. Schmeidler
{"title":"经济模型的类比,第三版","authors":"I. Gilboa, Andrew Postlewaite, L. Samuelson, D. Schmeidler","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2209153","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"People often wonder why economists analyze models whose assumptions are known to be false, while economists feel that they learn a great deal from such exercises. We suggest that part of the knowledge generated by academic economists is case-based rather than rule-based. That is, instead of offering general rules or theories that should be contrasted with data, economists often analyze models that are \\theoretical cases\", which help understand economic problems by drawing analogies between the model and the problem. According to this view, economic models, empirical data, experimental results and other sources of knowledge are all on equal footing, that is, they all provide cases to which a given problem can be compared. We offer complexity arguments that explain why case-based reasoning may sometimes be the method of choice and why economists prefer simple cases.","PeriodicalId":106740,"journal":{"name":"ERN: Other Econometrics: Econometric Model Construction","volume":"24 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-01-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Economic Models as Analogies, Third Version\",\"authors\":\"I. Gilboa, Andrew Postlewaite, L. Samuelson, D. Schmeidler\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.2209153\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"People often wonder why economists analyze models whose assumptions are known to be false, while economists feel that they learn a great deal from such exercises. We suggest that part of the knowledge generated by academic economists is case-based rather than rule-based. That is, instead of offering general rules or theories that should be contrasted with data, economists often analyze models that are \\\\theoretical cases\\\", which help understand economic problems by drawing analogies between the model and the problem. According to this view, economic models, empirical data, experimental results and other sources of knowledge are all on equal footing, that is, they all provide cases to which a given problem can be compared. We offer complexity arguments that explain why case-based reasoning may sometimes be the method of choice and why economists prefer simple cases.\",\"PeriodicalId\":106740,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ERN: Other Econometrics: Econometric Model Construction\",\"volume\":\"24 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2013-01-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ERN: Other Econometrics: Econometric Model Construction\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2209153\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ERN: Other Econometrics: Econometric Model Construction","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2209153","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

人们常常想知道,为什么经济学家分析那些假设众所周知是错误的模型,而经济学家却觉得他们从这样的练习中学到了很多东西。我们认为,学院派经济学家产生的部分知识是基于案例的,而不是基于规则的。也就是说,经济学家经常分析“理论案例”模型,而不是提供应该与数据进行对比的一般规则或理论,这有助于通过在模型和问题之间进行类比来理解经济问题。根据这种观点,经济模型、经验数据、实验结果和其他知识来源都是平等的,也就是说,它们都提供了可以对给定问题进行比较的案例。我们提供了复杂的论证,解释了为什么基于案例的推理有时可能是选择的方法,以及为什么经济学家更喜欢简单的案例。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Economic Models as Analogies, Third Version
People often wonder why economists analyze models whose assumptions are known to be false, while economists feel that they learn a great deal from such exercises. We suggest that part of the knowledge generated by academic economists is case-based rather than rule-based. That is, instead of offering general rules or theories that should be contrasted with data, economists often analyze models that are \theoretical cases", which help understand economic problems by drawing analogies between the model and the problem. According to this view, economic models, empirical data, experimental results and other sources of knowledge are all on equal footing, that is, they all provide cases to which a given problem can be compared. We offer complexity arguments that explain why case-based reasoning may sometimes be the method of choice and why economists prefer simple cases.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信