Let's be Honest About Mathematics
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 8 сен 2024
- Eric Weinstein - mathematician, economist, Managing Director of Thiel Capital, discusses the role of mathematics in economics.
Watch the full interview at: www.ineteconomics.org/ideas-papers/interviews-talks/is-technology-killing-capitalism
ERIC WEINSTEIN DIDNT KILL HIMSELF
posting for the future
This is funny and horrible at the same time, its funnrible!
There are plenty of sick minds out there that will get the wrong idea from such a comment. Still, I just hope EW takes care of himself.
As a matthematician I want to say that economists use different names for the same mathematical concepts depending on context, which I find overcomplicated as well
Spital Helles lol I took eco major but it seems like I’m doing maths only. Barely any economics in it
i'm no trigonometrician but i believe those moles form what is known as an isosceles triangle
skotoseme fuck you would have a bit of fun with my face hahahaha
The proper term for background designation would be a "Geometer" rather than "Trigonometrician" - and yes those moles do form an isosceles triangle but we can make an even stronger statement - they form an equilateral triangle.
Helmut and Moshe well i never claimed to be a geometer either
skotoseme,
I guess you were watching his face instead of listening to his words.
skotoseme,
On second thought, after watching this vid again,
I couldn't help staring at his blemishes.
It's quite distracting.
The first time I played the vid, I wasn't really watching it,
but the second time around ALL I thinking
"why doesn't he go to a dermatologist and get those burned off?"
I am assuming he is a college professor.
Can you imagine the students in his class
going through the Herculean effort to pay attention to
his lectures and keep a straight face?
I see a trapezoid
He is correct that there is sometimes a tendency in economics for mathturbation, but in general, economists try to keep the math as simple as possible. Anyways, it is usually the physicists and mathematicians who enter economics who engage in the most mathturbation. The point of most economic modeling is to accurately explain, and perhaps even predict, the dynamics of some economic system. A good economic model might also be one that lends itself well to informing empirical research, and so makes certain simplifying assumptions based on the availability of certain types of data. It doesn’t need to be that way and researchers can develop other modeling techniques if they wish, and if it works better, then that’s great. His final point is also not a good one. Scientists do not develop theories for the purpose of insulating them from political interference, nor should they.
....sooo what you're saying is that math is a lobster?
Soo what you're saying is we should organize our society like the lobsters?
So you are saying that female lobsters shouldn't be allowed to enter School?
OMG I love how this has become a meme :D
Amir Sultan So what you're saying is that you love patriarchal oppression?
Clean your room bucko
When you don’t pass algebra.....
HeLP, I'm GeTTinG bRUtaLiZed!
I have a modest degree in Mathematics...and I took a couple of Economics courses at Yale (on RUclips).
In one of those courses, John Geanakoplos discussed certain financial instruments (thought to be safe because [my assertion] people who didn't understand the math (or forgot the derivation) behind the instruments misused those instruments.
In the other course a simple (non-mathematical) model was developed in the first week of class--which almost certainly does NOT reflect the world we actually live in...and for that first week the whole class seemed aware of the unreality of the model...but the next thing you know--a few weeks have passed and conclusions are being made about how to invest in our world...based on that model.
I have, of course, other experiences from my readings, life, and work, that lead me to the conclusion that it's dangerous to forget (or fail to ever understand) the qualifiers and limitations of a model (mathematical or not).
Economics - The science of explaining tomorrow why the predictions you made yesterday didn't come true today.
One of the dangers of listening to a few econ classes on RUclips, or even in college for that matter, is the fact that people seem to think all of econ is based on unrealistic models. Of course they made predictions about investing according to that model, because it is a classroom and they (probably undergrads) were taught how to use a model.
Also many times changing the assumptions does not yield any more insight, just more tedious algebra.
Basic physics teaches you that acceleration due to gravity does not depend on the the weight of the object. According to my limited knowledge of Physics, I beg to differ! How dare they! What an unrealistic profession!.
AMAWASAU - All Models Are Wrong And Some Are Useful. -George P.E. Box.
When I see how "analysts" look at all that economic indexes graphs etc I want to cry!
Hold up Mark, you mean to say that math may be actually a good rigorous standard and not simply an exercise left for the reader (ivy league student)? Next thing you'll say is that even good mathematical models can fail for reasons that were not yet understood by our current knowledge.
Math is a language for exterior fields. it is a tool for itself only. You can argue that many of new maths (research level) need some revision and unification but that cames later and it is just the normal course of math development. When you are talking about math as a laguage for exterior fields, then if there is a problem it is in the modelization not in math itself. You are just using the wrong math for your particular problem.
Agharabo finally a good comment thank you
What's ironic is it seems like his question is formulated to be intentionally confusing in a such a way to make people just accept that his thesis is correct.
His point is that one singular number for averages is not good because it can be misleading? Great. Sure. But that's not an issue with math. That's an issue with statistics being misused.
Basically. Math can actually explain everything when used correctly.
He seems to be saying math is designed to be intentionally confusing to that it can only be used by an in-group, and so that it can be used to manipulate the masses.
Well no kidding. I don’t think his intent was to criticize math. It’s to criticize people who deliberately make things more confusing than necessary for personal gain. Like legal jargon is deliberately complex for the same reason - so you need a lawyer who can understands it.
the existence of a fields imply the existence of objects which transform in a definite way in the field. It's in this way we were able to discover particles and how they interact. The premise is that now you'd be able to make predictions about how certain quantities change in economics and that this is a much more true representation of the underlying mechanism. If it is correct it's akin to when quantum mechanics was first discovered.
@@Woodside235 he's not saying "math is designed to be intentionally confusing", but that math can be USED to be intentional confusing. The example I'm thinking of is when assets are bundled together and structured into securities that can be sold to investors. When the structure is intentionally complex it obfuscates the value of the assets the securities represent. Then the bundlers (cough Gldmn Schs cough) can sell low value assets (such as defaulted loans) for a higher price because investors don't know what they are
So basically: People ignore certain variables when it suits their interests.
That's his wife interviewing him. Weird.
Serious? That's actually his wife?
@@paulden3158 Yes it actually is. In his podcast with Sam Harris, he points out that he married an indian immigrant.
Economics - The science of explaining tomorrow why the predictions you made yesterday didn't come true today.
Economics is a huge joke. It's a school of knowledge that only serves to justify Capitalism
🤣
@@MazBringsby is that bad?
Inflation should be a field
Flat? I agree
I’ve studied math at two different universities and I’ve encountered a misanthropic professor in both. Definitely something to watch out for if you are a math/stats major.
It is a little surprising that smart people would be misanthropic. Weinstein is not smart, and that's why he loves humanity.
Interviewer response (edited out): "Okay... if you say so."
I like all the Math in Economics. It keeps all the SJWs away from the field.
It does in my university at least. There's tons of social justice "activism" going on, but my econ program is free of all of it, since SJWs seem to be mathophobic...
Love it!...SJWs couldn't do math even if they tried!
jetmanisme it doesn’t save the non-“SJW”’s either though.....if you plan to have children.... majority of your kids teachers are “SJW”’s ..... good luck buddy..... I love the classist structure of your comment assuming it will save you .... btw, “Econ” major? Really? 😂😂😂 ok...... good luck buddy, hopefully quickbooks doesn’t eliminate your job by next Saturday 😂😂😂 “Econ” 😂😂😂
“My Econ program is free of it all” 😂 you should change that to “my Econ program is free on RUclips” ..... who still spends 4 years in school to learn “Econ” 😂😂😂
What do you plan to do with your Econ degree? 😂😂😂. Out-Math quickbooks and SAP? 😂😂😂😂😂
Gotta love Econ majors pretending to be mathematicians. Lol. Algebra.
tripp it’s literally embarrassing that he really tried that 😂😂😂 “math” 😂😂😂 ok bro.... while ACTUAL mathematicians are making quantum computers this Quickbooks balance sheet reader is REALLY claiming mathematical intellect 😂😂😂😂 ok bro
I failed to see the connection between his point "math is often used to cryptic information that is otherwise obvious" and the example "using scalars to describe fields is nonsense...it's subject to manipulation". The first point is kinda a conspiracy theory while the second point says the math is not enough; we need better math model. (the simple math models which is ambiguous is subject to fiddling)...so the idea is we should use (slightly) more complicated model to prevent fiddling?
I mean this guy is super smart, so I'm pretty sure he knows what he is talking about. I just didn't get his point.
Math is a language like English or French. It has rules. The only thing math should be used for is to help explain a complex concept that cannot be expressed in words alone. But often it is used as a bullying or intimidation tool by those who know it against those who don’t. I often imagine just how many brilliant minds who just weren’t taught properly gave up to do more mediocre things as a result. It’s a loss to us all.
He is correct when he says it's used as a intimidation tool! have you ever seen a financial report of a operating corporation!? it is literally legalese in the form of numbers.....pages upon pages of numbers typed in 8 point font. It's sick!
Teacher: where is your homework?
Me:
Eric should read Von Mises and the Austrians, they were talking about this a long time ago... Cantillon effects and the non-uniformity of price changes from inflating money supply.
Did this guy just get upset about the fact that people prefer the idea of an average?
The interviewer is his wife btw. Pia malaney
This happens in every industry.
definitely not that, go back to alex jones
Could the nature of your comment be you trying to simplify complex and abstract ideas into a simple good vs bad idea in which you can easily digest and move on without much effort into personal critical thinking?
When it comes to inflation scalars are the simple solution where fields are the more complicated ones. Most people can graps a number but the concept of a field is beyond them.
"the temperature in new york is 70 degrees" okay
"the temperature in texas is 91 degrees" understandable
"the temperature of new york is 70 degrees and texas is 91 degrees at the same time" *what the fuck*
@@Peterscraps Yes ... because everyone has experience with temperature. But most people have less of a feel for tax policy, durable goods orders, and the CPI ... and how those things might impact inflation. So, yeah. You want a simple number for people who don't know the nuances of the field.
@@kdmdlo I completely agree
I think inflation is more like a rate of global warming, rather than local temperature! Besides - he's talking about "intimidating with the terminology" and then just "drops" "theoretical particle physics". An economy is more of a DESCRIPTIVE science (unlike physics) - we can't really test most of the hypothesis to the same level. Main value of Economic models is their usefulness to policymakers, or, in case of hedge funds - how much return can a certain model generate.
Idk, I actually tend to see the opposite problem in the field. Too simple mathematics, too simple models that all derive from too simple theories that rely on very simplistic assumptions. I understand that the point of economics is to not only to show the data but also to interpret it in a way that can be used by most people, but relying on overly simplistic models is what I believe led to the financial crisis of 2009. It was mathematicians who were so enamored with the mathematics of economics that actually were able to predict the crisis that were occurring and understand how to effectively deal with these problems (I'm thinking of Minsky and Keynes here).
i think the woman interviewing is eric's wife :O
Pretty good criticism. But his last statement needs some expanding. What does he mean by "autonomous mathematics" and especially what does this mean in opposition to "mathematics amenable to special pleading from powerful interests"?
When Galileo said math is the language in which God wrote the universe, maybe he didn't specify that any mathematical statement can be translated into prose english (or any other language.) And, that as far as we know verbal language (which includes math) is adequate to describe the universe as we see it.
Eric knows math, but he likes words more.
The proper term for background designation would be a "Geometer" rather than "Trigonometrician" - and yes those moles do form an isosceles triangle but we can make an even stronger statement - they form an equilateral triangle.
That is true... About everything in the world... Which is a pattern in all industries.
This is very interesting. So are you implying that local factors would influence major economic factors. like price of gas or an local interest?
I took some PhD economics. What he’s saying is they throw in a particular fairly complex mathematical construct, do “proofs” with it, then consider it a “model.” This is almost completely arbitrary. You need to be almost a mathematician to use the model. Meanwhile, at Google they are doing better work arguably.
777jones -however we could also say every field suffers from this syndrome when you conceptualize how industries are constructed.
Just my two cents of opinion
I don't quite understand what he means by 'fields' in this sense. A field is a set which has the basic operations defined (add, subtract, multiply, divide), for example, the real numbers.
His example of temperature doesn't suggest that the data types are wrong when they are fed in, it is an analogy about granularity, and has nothing to do with fields in a mathematical sense.
Keep giving the info and soon it will be heard and heeded.
Not clear on what the difference is between a scalar and a field. Can someone give me an example of this difference?
Scalars are part of number fields, but something like a temperature EDIT: (Temperature Gradient) is a vector field.
lol no, are you sure you know what a vector is?
Nestor of Laconia
You have a good implicit point. Vectors are anything that can satisfy the vector axioms. I suppose that static temperature would be treated as a scalar field over space, but any temperature gradient would be well described as a vector.
I feel as though you've needlessly complicated things. And for what? Why did you even mention scalar fields and vector fields?
Nestor of Laconia
I'm just having fun responding to a small detail of the video. I thought you had a fair implied criticism, since I didn't use the word "gradient," but are you needlessly nitpicking, or just having fun like me?
@@pauliunknown8118 Because that was a major point in the video lol, did you even watch it?
Well, wait a minute. I'm an applied mathematician and not an economist. But when you say that the rate of inflation is "x", it's done for a simple reason. It provides everyday people an opportunity to grasp a very rough idea of what is going on in the economy but in very simple terms. Any mathematical economist would, by contrast, never use such a simple measure. So you're knocking the economist for being too specific and then turn around and accuse them of being too broad and general (i.e., not specific enough) with the data. You're speaking out of both sides of your mouth.
Anybody who knows first thing about math knows why its cryptic.
This sounds smart
That’s a good sign that you don’t understand
@@jjcevallos12 haha, yes it is, isn't it.
Alexander Ryan don’t feel bad though, I probably don’t understand it as well as I think I do.
@@jjcevallos12 fundamentally, I think he's saying that the world is more complex than our current representation(s) of it. It requires more nuanced analysis and reason, for example, how he says that the introduction of certain mathematics could be accompanied by a written document in order to make its context more understandable would be helpful as it provides a more ecological view of how it relates to what else exists in the mathematical landscape. Is that how you understood it? To be honest, I think my original comment was a joke, although I don't remember writing it haha
Alexander Ryan sorry for late reply but that is not exactly how I understood it. I’ll have my interpretation posted her by the morning though
This is a good thing! It keep the value of a profession high! In an age where the college degree is losing value as is, we cant afford for its value to be dropped even further.
Plus there always technical fields which arent as math heavy as the professional one, but still pay well. So, keep things as is
Good point. I think most of the brutality comes from the heavy need for memorization which is rich since you year from so many people in your pre-college years that memorization isn’t important.
Where does this get anyone?
Is he talkning about fields as in fields in abstract algebra?
please don't fiddle with my scalar
You don’t have to be a mathematician to know that many math driven fields are ideologically driven. The range of phenomena that economics is trying to deal with is too big of a data set. To simplify the set you make choices that are biased and then you get biased answers.
Just slap on Bloomberg for a couple minutes. What they’re talking about is so simple to understand yet they over complicate so much
Weinstein mischaracterizes the criticism. No one is saying that math is wrong, or even biased...the criticism is that it's the wrong tool. Let's be honest, Economics is not a science. No one cares if we can learn about human behavior using the price mechanism. Economics is a practical applied program: it is an attempt to answer the questions "what should we do? How should we use our resources? What is best for everybody." It is not at all clear that that question has a mathematical answer. The answer might come from sociology, neuroscience, the military or even religion. Trying to find patterns in the chaos of markets hasn't helped us much, and it probably won't in the future.
Saying Economics isn't science is like saying sociology isn't science, or ecology isn't science.
Are we trying to understand the fundamental principles that a complex system? Are we making hypothesis? Are we testing them or subjecting them to rigorous thought experiments.
Then it's a science. And actually it has helped a bunch. WE have models of human behavior. We have philosophical and conceptual tools for constructing policies, and we can make predictions from initial inputs. It's hardly a perfect science. It's a fuzzy one. Markets aren't random chaos. They are patterned chaos, with chaotic attractors built into them, another principle discovered through scientific inquiry.
What does he mean by a field? Does he just mean a vector rather than a scalar? Why is he using the word field; It doesn't seem to be in the econ jargon when I look online.
Even this explanation is too complicated...start with percent vs absolute value.
Not knowing the difference/definition of those two concepts allows people to be convinced that the wealthy in America pay "their fair share."
Inflation should be known why is not a field
So you're saying socialism is better than capitalism because the math is too hard otherwise.
not hardly
Is he saying the problem with economics is it needs better concepts? (national inflation rate)
O Soul yeah
We have it. It's called praxeology. But it disproves every keynesian mainstream economic concept, so they don't like it. And act as if it's a crackpot concept. Like, if you have less purchasing power next year (the 2% inflation target), chances are, the economic activity might be reduced, going forward. But no, keynesian uses inflation trying to speed up the economy.
When I was a lad it was all fields.
Totally agree. Been sayin the exact same thing for years...
Now if I knew what fields are.
876 people failed college algebra
The biggest issue i have with econ and math in it is that these people act like they can calculate a chaotic state.
Intil we have enough meta data to be able to acuratly measure the wants of humans personalitys, most things in the market will look like chaos theory its so hard to predict fads and memes!
Amen to that
Seamen seamen your gf likes your seMen not amen
And Economics is not even a science. It's more like history: so what do they know!
preach. it.
I see this in the social sciences all the time. Complex stats that have no value only meant to make the author seem authoritative and obscure.
Let's be honest the only math the world cares about is the number in the bank account.
Frankly the only numbers I need to see is the American Debt. The terrible things that are happening in America where finacial ineqaulity is so great as compared to citizens of deloped countrie with much smaller levels of inequity . 24% of the population has had a mental illness in the past week? 150 murders per million people. Suicide by gun now beats every other deadly thing for men over 40 even heart disease and car crashes. Doubled down on the National Dept in 8 years. I am afraid to do the math on that one. High School drop out rate is insanity for a developed nation. Trade deals strictly behind closed doors. FEMA Coffins for every man woman and child. Those are the numbers buggin me along with the numbers our over due for reminder just who exactly is in charge around what else are they hiding from us? Frankly the bailouts as well how much money and how much is just sitting idle due to lack of investment? Got Plutos suggesting to Plutos tellin Plutos they better start spending or you may just wind up on the wrong end of a pitch fork
Except America is still a way better place to live than most of the more equal world. Hence the immigration crisis
Denouncing all that you perceive as wrongful without understanding how things function is a bad idea.
I didnt get the point of his talk
nice try Google algorithm
regulate other SELF-regulating...what now?
Interesting
Why try to reconcile 20th century math, with 18th century concepts of the free, autonomous individual? Why not update the concept of the "self" or "unit of analysis" to Heiddeger's Dasein? Dasein is a mainstream, orthodox, uncontroversial, modern concept, just like 20th century math. It's not post-modern. You guys call everything you don't understand "post-modernism." You are attacking a straw-man.
It's easier that way. Why discuss proper substance defended by real people if you can just attack a straw-man that doesn't reply, thus making it easier to further your point. It's a safe-space, basically.
Increasing GDP is not increasing Wealth it is only increasing Cash Flow. What is Net Domestic Product, NDP. Economists do not talk about that.
Economists treat air conditioners like bananas. Both get added to GDP when purchased, but you know a banana won't last long. The air conditioner should take years to wear out. What happens to the depreciation? What happened to the depreciation of the 200,000,000 cars that were in the US in 1994?
We are listening to economists who can't do algebra.
NDP = GDP - Dcap [Western economic calculation]
NDP = GDP - (Dcap + Dcon) [reality]
Dcap: Depreciation of Capital Goods
Dcon: Depreciation of Durable Consumer Goods
GDP: Grossly Distorted Propaganda
Economics and investing is a competitive field and as such has all manner of abuses.
👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻
It is intentionally cryptic because it has ideological rather than scientific goal, namely: _How to maintain _*_semblance_*_ of order and fairness._
Lot of work has to be done around the world and it's easier to exploit poor, defenseless and desperate for that purpose as they are closer to non-existance. Whole theory is then wrapped around this in order to sooth consciences (on the top) and justify suffering (on the bottom).
Its nothing but an excuse for things to stay as they are till technological and other factors enable meaningful change and new level of sincerity from PR shills, courtiers, experts and ideologues.
I'm gonna have to go with: your sociological rant is everything you accuse economics of. Several schools of economics produce theory that has predicted the basics of what we have seen in the last few hundred years. What sociological theories ever did that? Comte? Marx? Dubois? Almost every prediction these people made was exactly wrong.
I think that mathematics itself IS logic. Of course their are issues where those who know the language being able to obfuscate understanding and exclude opponents. The assumptions of a model can be easily interpereted enough for criticism as, assuming the math is correct, the model is the list of assumptions, not the math itself (the math itself is just a logical expansion of). To oppose a model, you oppose the assumptions of the model, not the math itself.
Matthew Graham
Exactly, and there is some truth to the idea that math is intentionally used to make things less accessible to people who don't understand it. Frankly though, everyone should learn the math if they're serious about understanding these issues. The math is the best way to see logical contradictions.
Great Moose Detective yeah sometimes it's hard to see why an assumption may be wrong until you look at the conclusions and interactions, it doesn't make it impossible to critique though
Marko Kraguljac what the fuck are you sayin? .. no maybe its just we like to analyze things, thats all.
Since when does economics have anything to do with math? I thought we all accepted long ago that 'economist' was just another name for a lobbyist who the MSM calls an authority on markets. FFS economists are so bad with predictions that they make weathermen seem omniscient.
oKaaaay.
Understand control theory. Applied calculus in it's most useful and usable form. Then anything is possible. Essentially what people fail to understand is that everything is a circuit. If you spend more money, you can access more money. Typical input-output function. It's why you see Trump give millions to charity. It's why TNC's spend billions on marketing. They know they will get it back and then some more on top. You can't hoard money, it must move, like water or electric current. It's really not complicated, it's so simple a child could understand. Also focal point of ones consciousness plays a vital role in manifestation of wealth. Focus on lack, you get lack. Focus on money, you get money. Again, a child could understand. Jon Lena says cash and money is more abundant than ever. BBC says we have a cash crisis in UK. What is really going on? Well that all depends on your state of mind. Perspective is everything.
LOL. No of course I don't, my wife earns serious bank, so I don't need to. If I had a job I wouldn't have time binge Netflix all day. I live the life of Riley my friend. I have all the time in the world to ponder the abyss of meaninglessness and leave cryptic comments on these sort of RUclips videos. I'm professionally unemployed. I occasionally do work for my friends business, which is electrical consultancy, but only every now and then.
I don't even watch Netflix it was a joke, I was being sarcastic. I study math, play Jazz piano and maintain our back yard. You sound like you need a wife who earns serious wedge so you enjoy the fruits of not needing a job.
oh and i pratice ceremonial magick and meditate, but most people think that weird.
yea it all lies. I'm actually single and work 60 hours a week.
i think this is called 'mathiness'
Allocate the Lobbyist, see where the money flows, calculate how it perturbs the models.
See how the world, and the future is modeled towards an epoch. --- Everything is Manipulated -- Never forget that!
This is absolutely correct. Maths professors crept into Economics departments (Esp those from India) and made them revolve around maths leading to the exclusion of the most lateral idea based students who were suffocated. I dropped out of an invited economics honours course because of this. I'd say if anything to economics academia try to bring out the equivalent of an economics MBA, perhaps say as a MPhil in Economics which is completely theory based with the acknowledgement that should mathematically orientated research confirmation be required a maths TECHNICIAN can be used. Academia has made Economics as a sensing type study rather that something for the intuitives. (Jungian psych types). In fact if I can make a further plea, make the MPhil econ available online and make acceptance a function of a theory paper submission from a minimum undergraduate level.
you need mathematics in everything. Eric Weinstein is discussing the abuse of mathematics nothing else.
degrees that don't require much math already exists they are called MA (and not MS) in economics,
or MS in political economy. look for those.
Raioneru I've seen loads of econometric papers and they're utter academic tripe. All the econometric models in the world amount to a hill of beans because of two simple aspects 1) Economics is never pure, its political economy and 2) Random walk. (Basic finance theory).
Economies can be far better managed like how a large multinational is, basic things like leading indicators. Large corporates are run on strategy etc not on some engineered mathematical tolerance. Econometrics in Finance is akin to day trade chartists and not fundamentalists.
Number Eight your comment reminded me of the works of Nassim Taleb's incerto. Would you care to connect the dots with his work as well? Thanks for the insights.
Number Eight I did the same thing. Switched into pure maths (but kept the minor since I had enough ECON credits). Something didn't smell right. I had a microeconomics professor who oozed that very cynicism about the models he was teaching us. Economists have a way of losing sight of the fact that their models are, in fact, *models*. And if they had a deeper understanding of what the algebra and the analysis they were doing really represented, they'd lose their confidence that their subject matter maps meaningfully onto product spaces of real numbers.
Economics is a social science that thinks it's a hard science. It needs to go back to basics, and we can start by *calling* it "political economy," because that's what economics is really about, to the extent that it's worth anything at all.
I can't tell you how relieved I am to see someone else make this point. I've been thinking it privately for years.
And yet his papers and all of his later works in economics makes it clear that economics must necessarily involve really complicated math. Neoclassical economics is seemingly analogous to field-theory with lie-groups and yang-mills theory. And math doesn't get much harder than those.
Physics and math majors call everything under multivar calc, cohomologies, linear-maps and vector spaces to be baby-math. Lie groups is a step up from those even.
That girl looks like she was about fall asleep.
ERIC! Love you and your bruv
Figures lie and liars figure?
Everything's a conspiracy to Eric haha.
ERIC IS ALWAYS MONEY
Eric’s IQ must be over 170.
Jordan TRusso No less than 150
measurability breaks down around the 160 mark
200 IQ
So it's an observation at mean+4standard deviations and over... no
I'm genuinely curious as to what led you to that conclusion based on a 2 minute RUclips video.
It’s inherent in our movements, dances, and CHamoru sciences : that’s how a so called “Philippine waitress SOMEHOW new how to do a 720 degree dance with a glass of water” Eric Weinstein via his unexplained sense of entitlement.
First of all: We respect Women and their Wisdom : so called aboriginal sciences were given value by cellular automata theories: If a black dot could arrive to such complexities as illustrated by RULE #30 : then perhaps its time to INVITE aboriginal sciences into the “discourse” and place your ego aside. (To Eric Weinstein’s feelings around being late to learning about Spinors from an intelligent Woman)
Stephen Wolfram didn’t demean a waitress to explain himself: and he doesn’t display the so called “ego” he is accused of having: once again: peoples feelings get in the way of the facts. It must have hurt to learn at a restaurant in the Philippines that “one May be late to a discovery” : “SOMEHOW” from a “waitress”. Stephen Wolfram extended his invitation to the world and our “different forms of logic” is precisely the forms of “specialized abstractions” that is helpful to our collective movement towards any form of unification. The Intellectual Underground: is/are OUR VOICES: First Voices : primitivism is an antiquated colloquial practice. We are grateful for Stephen Wolfram and his intelligence/humility. Thank you
Relax Eric: love tears the bark from the trees
Bb Shady Join us live and watch for yourself : ruclips.net/video/h7KubYwCxAg/видео.html
Bb Shady Eric, can we please address your xenophobic response? Shall we address your “wtf lmooo” with your employer or a public platform? Your silence is predictable: since you wonder how we know it’s you: why not wonder how you have assumed whom you think you are addressing with such a fearful comment? Yes sir: explain yourself please:
Bb Shady Xenophobic user that oppressed and belittles aboriginal peoples and other so called “people of color” on RUclips. Also goes by the name of Eric Weinstein : under investigation by the WORLD COMMUNITY: has taken refuge in his “The Portal” podcast/RUclips channel in order to disseminate his oppressive ideologies. (Spat out of England’s scientific community and ow taking it out on the world) Such as “Philippine waitresses” that have achieved the opportunity to make substantial contributions to what he considers “his life’s work”: He has mentioned my Mother on many interviews : my mother has requested to address his oppressive descriptions of their interaction and his lack of addressing her intelligence. Mr. Weinstein has been threatened by the magnitude and direction of the Scientific/Mathematical achievements of what he refers to as a “Philippine waitress that “somehow knew how to spin a glass 720 degrees without spilling it” : it appears that this “colonial attitude” towards intelligence as it presents itself within humanity- is very present in Eric Weinstein’s life and therefore he has been making comments attacking my Mother via this account and others. We are publishing a book and releasing a film series that will put this behavior at rest once and for all. Meanwhile, like all little boys that are not aware of their xenophobic behavior (he is always defending himself: so he didn’t catch himself digging up the dinosaur bones we are presenting in court.)
Eric Weinstein is a Xenophobic user that oppresses and belittles aboriginal peoples and other so called “people of color” on RUclips: Under Bb Shady and other RUclips channels.
Also goes by the name of Eric Weinstein : under investigation by the WORLD COMMUNITY: has taken refuge in his “The Portal” podcast/RUclips channel in order to disseminate his oppressive ideologies. (Spat out of England’s scientific community and ow taking it out on the world) Such as “Philippine waitresses” that have achieved the opportunity to make substantial contributions to what he considers “his life’s work”: He has mentioned my Mother on many interviews : my mother has requested to address his oppressive descriptions of their interaction and his lack of addressing her intelligence. Mr. Weinstein has been threatened by the magnitude and direction of the Scientific/Mathematical achievements of what he refers to as a “Philippine waitress that “somehow knew how to spin a glass 720 degrees without spilling it” : it appears that this “colonial attitude” towards intelligence as it presents itself within humanity- is very present in Eric Weinstein’s life and therefore he has been making comments attacking my Mother via this account and others. We are publishing a book and releasing a film series that will put this behavior at rest once and for all. Meanwhile, like all little boys that are not aware of their xenophobic behavior (he is always defending himself: so he didn’t catch himself digging up the dinosaur bones we are presenting in court.) Bb Shady : you should C# after so much “education”
Read "Read Basic" economics by Thomas Sowell. No math and everything is covered
This interviewer is wet rn
mhm... I smell bs
I hate mathematics
Nothing appeals to me more than maths in economics or in science and other lessons because most people are frankly terrible at it so when you are graded relative to your peers it becomes very easy. Teachers always make statements about that stuff and they always seem wrong but that is the case with 99% of what they seem to say in my school.
Look in to praxeology.
those 3 zits on his face form an equilateral triangle
They look like blobs of fat.
What is he babbling about?
That purposeful oversimplification benefits special interest groups.
Talk about private prisons and human bondage in this country first. Then figure your fancy numbers.. corruption is at a stupid scale. You don't have a scale. Use the Scandinavians and try to covert to the us system.. we won't metric
All Systems Metre
If you listen closely you'll notice that he's really talking about the AGW/climate change scam. :)
Math is fairly useless in economics, excluding econometrics and anything data related.
Yes, but the problem with economics they are trying to make it a science with the only proof being maths, as I've always said... they then are precise, precisely wrong. You don't settle a legal argument with math, you shouldn't true to settle an economic argument with it either. Economics is inherently political economy so its never going to be a probabilistic and predictable outcome. Economics also has a lot of random walk in it, it's like those damned chartists in Finance trying to use maths when fundamentalists look at all the factors. Anyway, I predicted the last recession, you only needed a modicum of knowledge around leading indicators ie precursors to see a storm was approaching.
Given enough computational power, you could take a "psychohistoric" appraoch like described by Asimov to any human activity field. But economics is not just numbers and is very hard to measure to such degrees.
Statistics is a science, the science of lying.
Great Moose Detective it's just a tool. As the video states with interest rates, if you use one average value for the whole nation it is not representative. But a field i.e more statistics can be a better option.
Don't blame the tool, just hate on the people who misuse it. Only way to know is if you educate yourself
swarna Prakash
The problem with social science statistics (and studies) is that they require you to trust that their source 1) knew what to calculate and 2) calculated it honestly. Neither assumption is ever safe, and you always have to check them for yourself, before you repeat them. And of course, no one does this, so statistics become the refuge of liars.
Godel's incompleteness theorem proves math is incomplete. The truth-content of all incomplete systems is equal. Therefore saying math is more truthful than other incomplete systems is special pleading.
But Gödel demonstrated something quite different than your claim that the truth content of any two incomplete systems S1 and S2 is equivalent.
In fact he showed that by adding sufficient productions to S1, it could be made complete. Unfortunately the resulting system S2 is itself provably incomplete. But these two systems, by this demonstration, are evidently not truth-equivalent.
That is quite a shallow interpretation of Gödel's incompleteness theorem. The incompleteness theorem itself is a mathematical concept, thus either that theorem is more truthful than anything else, or it isn't, in which case there may be a system that is more truthful than any other else. The theorem shows merely that Hilbert's ambition to find a set of axioms for all mathematics is impossible. That in itself is a mathematical truth. This just makes mathematics precisely more truthful than other systems.
There is only one empirical test you need: is everyone satisfied with everything? No? Then you're wrong. If you have to justify yourself, you're wrong. Everyone is rational. Please leave the ideology out of it.
What a horrible fucking test. I am not satisfied with it. Thus, it is wrong
All equations are tautologies. Empiricism requires self-contradiction.
Well, of course all equations are tautologies, but that is far from proving that all a priori statements are. The proposition "There exist propositions" is true, a priori and non-tautological. Your empirical test is far from anything you can "justify yourself". I really don't get your point... If you have to use an argument for something, it is wrong? And why that test? Why not use the test "Is every human a dog? No? Then you're wrong" or "Is everyone 14 years old? No? Then you're wrong?". Please, provide some kind of justification (of the non-empirical kind) that can explain how your system is right
If the social function = everyone is better off, then each individual is better off. The empirical test that validates this proposition is asking everyone if they are better off. The proposition "people are better-off, but they say they aren't, because statements are unreliable" is self-contradictory, because if people can make unreliable statements, then all statements are unreliable (to some degree). People are either rational, or they aren't. The idea that only some people can be 100% rational is special pleading.
The idea of solving for cardinal rationality presents the same problems as every other cardinal voting system.
I think inflation is broken down into its components e.g. food, gas, wages... another physicist lost in the field of economics. The mindlessness of human beings is the real issue. He needs to be less data critiquing and more focused on human emotional market interactions, for it is that which fucks up the wider economy.