|
On drawing conclusions
from experiments:
[I]t is in the transition
from experiment to conclusion, from knowledge to
application, that all one's inner enemies lie in wait as
at a mountain pass–imagination, impatience, rashness,
self-complacency, rigidity, conventionality, prejudice,
sloth, frivolity, fickleness, and all the rest, all lurk
in ambush here to surprise and overpower the active man
of the world...
~Goethe, Goethe's
Botanical Writings (p. 223)
On reviewing other
people's work:
In many ways, the work of a critic is
easy. We risk very little yet enjoy a position over
those who offer up their work and their selves to our judgment. We thrive on negative
criticism, which is fun to write and to read. But the
bitter truth we critics must face is that, in the grand
scheme of things, the average piece of junk is more
meaningful than our criticism designating it so. But
there are times when a critic truly risks something, and
that is in the discovery and defense of the new.
~Anton Ego,
Ratatouille
On experimental economics
and
i-pis-tuh-mol-uh-what?
One who aspires to explain
or understand human behaviour must be, not finally but
first of all, an epistemologist.
~Frank H. Knight,
The Ethics of Competition (p. 77)
On economics and human
behavior:
Economics is a branch of aesthetics and
ethics to a larger degree than of mechanics.
~Frank H. Knight,
The Ethics of Competition (p. 97)
On thinking in economics:
It is probably true that economic
analysis has never been the product of detached
intellectual curiosity about the why of social
phenomena, but of an intense urge to reconstruct a world
which gives rise to profound dissatisfaction. (p. 122)
Even to-day it is regarded almost as a
sign of moral depravity if the economist finds anything
to marvel at in his science; i.e. if he finds an
unsuspected order in things, which arouses his wonder.
And he is bitterly reproached if he does not emphasise,
at every stage of his analysis, how much he regrets that
his insight into the order of things makes it less easy
to change them whenever we please. (p. 124)
By combining elementary conclusions and
following up their implications [an economist] gradually
constructs, from the familiar elements, a mental model
which aims at reproducing the working of the economic
system as a whole. Whether we use as a basis facts which
are known from everyday experience, or facts which have
been laboriously collected by statistical or historical
research, the importance and the difficulty of this
further task remains the same, and the only test of its
usefulness as a tool of interpretation is whether, by
impeccable logic, it yields a model which reproduces
movements of the type which we observe in the modern
world. Only when we have carried to its logical
conclusion this task of fitting the known parts
together, so that we realise all the implications of
their co-existence, are we able to say whether the known
facts from which we have started are sufficient for the
explanation of the more complicated phenomena. (p.
128, my emphasis)
~F.A. Hayek, "The
Trend of Economic Thinking," Economica,
May 1933.
Our idealized notion of theory:
A theory is something other than myself.
It may be set out on paper as a system of rules, and it
is more truly a theory the more completely it can be put
down in such terms…A theory on which I rely is therefore
objective knowledge in so far as it is not I, but the
theory, which is proved right or wrong when I use such
knowledge…A theory, moreover, cannot be led astray by my
personal illusions…a theory on which I rely as part of
my knowledge remains unaffected by any fluctuations
occurring within myself. It has a rigid formal
structure, on whose steadfastness I can depend whatever
mood or desire may possess me…Since the formal
affirmations of a theory are unaffected by the state of
the person accepting, theories may be constructed
without regard to one’s normal approach to experience.
Until we humbly come to grips with the
observation that:
Symbols must be identifiable and their
meaning known, axioms must be understood to assert
something, proofs must be acknowledged to demonstrate
something, and this identifying, knowing, understanding,
and acknowledging, are unformalized operations on
which the working of a formal system depends. (my
emphasis)
~Michael Polanyi,
Personal Knowledge (pp. 4 and 258)
|