Hmmm...
What frustrates me about Austrians on Wikipedia is that they dominate the "critiques" section of every damn economics topic you'd care to look at. Somebody that didn't know any better would think that a third of the profession is Austrian and that they represent a substantial voice in the literature.
Wednesday, February 20, 2013
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
It's gotten better lately but a few years ago every other economics article presented not only the Austrian position, but Ron Paul's personal opinion on the topic (of COURSE it's notable! he's a CONGRESSMAN!).
ReplyDeleteWhat? I really don't know.
ReplyDeleteMe neither.
DeleteI don't think it's necessarily a bad thing. They also tend to be pretty small compared to the rest of the article. It's just that those articles could be better written in general (including the Austrian critiques).
ReplyDeleteI know! It's just like when those Ron Paul fans would vote for him in online polls, skewing the results. I don't know why these people keep trying to spread their ideas, what the hell?
ReplyDeleteThere's a difference between voting on an online poll and inserting fringe views unduly into what has become a public source of knowledge with a common reputation for objectivity (whether or not that reputation is deserved), Bob.
DeletePseudonymous wrote:
DeleteThere's a difference between voting on an online poll and inserting fringe views unduly into what has become a public source of knowledge with a common reputation for objectivity
So on economics articles on Wikipedia, Austrians shouldn't try to put in their views? I'm genuinely curious how you and Daniel expect Austrians to act.
I'm not sure I have any expectations for Austrians. It would be odd for me to tell them not to share their ideas.
DeleteBut would you agree with me that Wikipedia economics articles give the uninformed a skewed view of what economics is like?
"So on economics articles on Wikipedia, Austrians shouldn't try to put in their views? I'm genuinely curious how you and Daniel expect Austrians to act."
DeleteI'm thinking of the presence of the seemingly obligatory "Austrian economists disagree" section on a bunch of articles where it's barely relevant. Here's a couple I found with a quick search: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Econometrics#Limitations_and_criticisms, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cobb%E2%80%93Douglas_production_function#Difficulties_and_criticisms, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hedonic_regression#Criticism
Fine. Somebody disagrees. But including fringe beliefs in a main Wikipedia article gives those beliefs an air of authority that they don't possess among experts in the know.
Pseudonymous makes a good point.
DeleteOn second thought, I do think Austrians should not share their views in many cases, just like I don't share my counter-view that empirical economics is good and a priorism is not preferred every single time I see that on Wikipedia.
People who are interested in these Austrian views can go to the Austrian economics page.
The state of economics on wikipedia is really, really bad, and it's not just because of the irritating preponderance of austrian editors. The economics template is a great overview of just how terrible it is. On the bright side, I do now know who Marilyn Waring is, although why she ranks high enough to be on the list of notable economists (over, say, Walras??) is quite unknown to me.
ReplyDeleteI agree. Those who aren't Austrians are Marxists, Sraffians or, worst of all, fans of Steve Keen.
Delete