美德的代价:关于可驾驭性如何塑造经济模型的一些假设

IF 0.3 Q4 ECONOMICS
Beatrice Cherrier
{"title":"美德的代价:关于可驾驭性如何塑造经济模型的一些假设","authors":"Beatrice Cherrier","doi":"10.4000/oeconomia.14116","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper seeks to convince historians that investigating how tractability has shaped individual and collective modeling choices in economics is a valuable endeavor. To do so, I first survey the economic methodology literature on tractability, one that grew out of methodologists’ attempts to explain why their authors make unrealistic assumptions. I then compare these accounts with the few instances where 20th century economists discussed tractability explicitly. This short survey suggests that there is a need for historians to document the collective dynamics at work when tractability motives are invoked. I suggest that disentangling theoretical, empirical and computational tractability might be fruitful, but also difficult. I ask how and why choices made for tractability purposes meant to be idiosyncratic and temporary often become collectively entrenched, sometimes creating “tractability traps.” Finally, I consider the existence of “tractability standards” that differ across time and fields.","PeriodicalId":43377,"journal":{"name":"Oeconomia-History Methodology Philosophy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Price of Virtue: Some Hypotheses on How Tractability Has Shaped Economic Models\",\"authors\":\"Beatrice Cherrier\",\"doi\":\"10.4000/oeconomia.14116\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper seeks to convince historians that investigating how tractability has shaped individual and collective modeling choices in economics is a valuable endeavor. To do so, I first survey the economic methodology literature on tractability, one that grew out of methodologists’ attempts to explain why their authors make unrealistic assumptions. I then compare these accounts with the few instances where 20th century economists discussed tractability explicitly. This short survey suggests that there is a need for historians to document the collective dynamics at work when tractability motives are invoked. I suggest that disentangling theoretical, empirical and computational tractability might be fruitful, but also difficult. I ask how and why choices made for tractability purposes meant to be idiosyncratic and temporary often become collectively entrenched, sometimes creating “tractability traps.” Finally, I consider the existence of “tractability standards” that differ across time and fields.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43377,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Oeconomia-History Methodology Philosophy\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Oeconomia-History Methodology Philosophy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4000/oeconomia.14116\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Oeconomia-History Methodology Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4000/oeconomia.14116","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

本文试图说服历史学家,调查可追溯性如何影响经济学中个人和集体的建模选择是一项有价值的努力。为此,我首先调查了有关可追溯性的经济方法论文献,这些文献源于方法论学家试图解释为什么他们的作者做出了不切实际的假设。然后,我将这些说法与20世纪经济学家明确讨论可追溯性的少数几个例子进行比较。这一简短的调查表明,历史学家有必要在可追溯性动机被调用时记录起作用的集体动力。我认为,将理论、经验和计算的可追溯性分离开来可能是富有成效的,但也很困难。我的问题是,为可追溯性目的而做出的选择原本是特殊的、暂时的,但如何以及为什么往往会变得根深蒂固,有时会产生“可追溯性陷阱”。最后,我考虑了“可追溯性标准”的存在,这些标准在不同的时间和领域是不同的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Price of Virtue: Some Hypotheses on How Tractability Has Shaped Economic Models
This paper seeks to convince historians that investigating how tractability has shaped individual and collective modeling choices in economics is a valuable endeavor. To do so, I first survey the economic methodology literature on tractability, one that grew out of methodologists’ attempts to explain why their authors make unrealistic assumptions. I then compare these accounts with the few instances where 20th century economists discussed tractability explicitly. This short survey suggests that there is a need for historians to document the collective dynamics at work when tractability motives are invoked. I suggest that disentangling theoretical, empirical and computational tractability might be fruitful, but also difficult. I ask how and why choices made for tractability purposes meant to be idiosyncratic and temporary often become collectively entrenched, sometimes creating “tractability traps.” Finally, I consider the existence of “tractability standards” that differ across time and fields.
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
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
17
审稿时长
35 weeks
×
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