Earth Over Steel

We took Econ for our STEAM class and S.T.E.A.M stands for Science, Technology, Engineering, Architecture, and Mathematics. What part of the acronym dose Economics fit into? If you think Mathematics your wrong and this project will so you why

Summary

Work with Clay, not Metal

(HP 2021)

Once economics was thought of as a science, economists have become obsessed with making models. Many of these models are based off of physics. This is helpful for making simple models as a branch of mathematics but it distracts from everything else. As anybody who did high school math knows, the more variables there are in a formula, the less people want to work with it and that's exactly what economists did. They rendered down and loose ends into “external factors'' and used formulas to describe what was left. They turned economics into physics’s deliberately obtuse little brother. 

Those models also use the constant of “The man” or Homo economicus to create a world populated by this money driven, selfish mockery of humanity. The issue is “The man” is not a man. This theory of economicus represents the minority of humanity. So as any good scientist should, economists should throw out this theory for a more robust one. But after centuries of this false model defining humanity the constant stands. 

So it is up to the next generation of economists to reorganize this math into something more fitting: a science. Economics is another study of life, the biology of the modern man. Biology is intentionally difficult to describe mathematically because if you want to describe life, you need to recognize the abundance of randomness and variables. You need to abandon mathematics and only look for patterns. If you want to predict how the economy will get affected it is best to work in concrete terms. To create a man more varied and more natural.

Commentary

In the book Doughnut Economics, Rayworth makes a point that the current economic models are false. Like she said, “All these critiques they’re interesting yes but they’re distracting us from the real concepts we have to master which are utility and efficiency and growth and the complexities they get in the way of the modeling and the maths that economists love to do because it turns economists into scientists.” I tried to remedy this because this sounds like a call to view the economy as an ecosystem where everything is a variable. Specifically not to treat people like a constant and instead treat them individually. Instead of viewing the ecosystem like a machine that follows the rules of physics, instead create a web to view how one variable changing spreads through the system. And use the web of cause and effect as a model for how to properly change the economy for everyone and to see how elements in the net will adapt. Im not the only one with that stance. 

"The late twentieth century was the heyday of deductive economics. Talented and facile theorists set the intellectual agenda... Theory turned out to be too malleable

In contrast, the twenty-first century will be the age of inductive economics, when empiricists hold sway and advice is grounded in concrete observation..

Should this reassure us that we can avoid another crisis? Alas, there is no such certainty. The only way of being certain that one will not fall down the stairs is to not get out of bed. But at least economists, having observed the history of accidents, will no longer recommend removing the handrail.” (Eichengreen)

The change of economic modeling and understanding will change the entire field but by changing economics from a math to a science. But it will help us shift from our man made bubble to the world at large .

mikethemadbiologist on March 21, 2011. “When Economists Misunderstand Biology.” ScienceBlogs, ScienceBlogs, 12 Mar. 2011, https://scienceblogs.com/mikethemadbiologist/2011/03/21/when-economists-misunderstand. 

Rayworth, Kate. Why It's Time for 'Doughnut Economics'. YouTube, YouTube, 16 Dec. 2014, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1BHOflzxPjI&ab_channel=TEDxTalks. Accessed 9 Nov. 2021.