Here is the draft of my introduction to the symposium on @rodrikdani's Economics Rules. Comments and suggestions are welcome. researchgate.net/publication/32…
In a nutshell, here is what I say in this introduction: (1) We should take the *questions* raised by the critics of economics seriously. This is regardless of whether they are right or wrong, or whether they are misinformed or not.
The *questions* concerning the epistemic value and policy relevance of economics are important. (2) In fact, economics has a great tradition of debates concerning economic methodology. Unfortunately, contemporary debates mostly ignore what has been already said.
Instead of reinventing the wheel, let us build on what we already know. To do this we need to take history of economics and early philosophers of economics seriously. To build on what we know, we have to know it.
(3) We need the improve the communication channels between economists, their critics, philosophers of economics and historians of economics. Particularly, note that economists and philosophers of economics will benefit a lot from knowing more about history of economics.
(4) Debates concerning economic models need to pay attention to the context of modeling, history of models, diversity of models, model selection, the relationship between models and explanation/policy (...)
(...) justification of unrealistic assumptions, misuse (and abuse) of models and appropriate disciplinary behavior in economics, model failures, and derivational robustness analysis.
(5) I think @rodrikdani's Economics Rules is a step forward on all of these issues. Let us critically discuss it and move forward. The symposium on Economics Rules is the first attempt. I hope others will follow.
