News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Magical Thinking by throwaway729 on Wednesday September 21, 2016 @10:55AM (#12548692)
> ... more subtle

Subtlety != non-magical. Confusing subtlety and depth with rigorous thinking -- or even worse, scientific thinking -- is a common confusion people fall into when engaging with economic theory. Both professionally and as a side interest, both on the left and on the right.

Existence of a large literature base, a big set of jargon, logically rigorous arguments, and mathematical models and theorems does not preclude fundamentally magical thinking.

If you disagree, go read some Christian Apologetics. Portions of the field are more rigorous and have far more subtlety than most economics. But sorry, it's still fundamentally rooted in (literally) magical thinking.

> priest-kings... alt-priests

So we've replaced magical thinking with jargon-y name calling. Progress...?

Re:Magical Thinking by acidbaseextract on Wednesday September 21, 2016 @07:33PM (#12553201)
Yeah I totally agree. I tried to read some of the guy's other articles as the ideas are really interesting, but man are they buried in jargon.