Both simultaneously. Standard economics can tame complexity economics when it’s dabbling in BS (such as incorrectly identifying macro structures that are false correlations) and complexity economics adds to the ontology of standard economics.

Both simultaneously. Standard economics can tame complexity economics when it’s dabbling in BS (such as incorrectly identifying macro structures that are false correlations) and complexity economics adds to the ontology of standard economics.

=====

 

Two terms I recently learned: Course grained and fine grained.
 
Rational-Man assumed balanced equilibrium.
Complexity does also, but pushes the equilibrium out into the unforeseeable future. This allows for minor “pendulum swingings” to gain focus and allows for things like catastrophes-as-acceptable (so long as it all works out in the end).
 
This is how complexity “gets around” the principal of equivalence — by pushing it to the beginning and/or end of the “system-as-seen-all-at-once). Or: it lets the math work.
 
I learned about Category Theory fibrations (on https://ncatlab.org/nlab/show/Grothendieck+fibration ) – which is basically a justification for rounding but in a fancy way and allowing for far more flexibility.
====

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


− two = 0

Leave a Reply