It’s been several months since we published our latest ranking of influential economic blogs. Below is an updated list of the top 200 economic blogs, ordered by their Onalytica Influence index.
An explanation of the methodology can be found in our previous post on influential economic blogs.
We report the same metrics as before: Onalytica Influence Index, Popularity and Over-Influence. Influence index is the impact factor of blogs, similar to the impact factor of academic journals; Popularity measures how well-known a blog is amongst other economic blogs and Over-Influence seeks to capture how influential a blog is compared to how popular it is.
There are quite a few new entries in the list as a results of our growing underlying corpus of economic blogs from which the most influential ones are calculated. Over time, we should expect to see a reduced number of economic blogs entering the top 200 for the first time.
During the last two centuries, the way economic science is done has changed radically: it has become a social science based on mathematical models in place of words. This book describes and analyses that change – both historically and philosophically – using a series of case studies to illuminate the nature and the implications of these changes. It is not a technical book; it is written for the intelligent person who wants to understand how economics works from the inside out. This book will be of interest to economists and science studies scholars (historians, sociologists and philosophers of science). But it also aims at a wider readership in the public intellectual sphere, building on the current interest in all things economic and on the recent failure of the so-called economic model, which has shaped our beliefs and the world we live in.
The World Economics Association recently interviewed me on the state of economics, inquiring about my views on pluralism in the profession. You can find the result on the WEA's newsletter here (the interview starts on page 9).
Economists make confident assertions in op-ed columns and on cable news—so why are their explanations often at odds with equally confident assertions fromother economists? And why are all economic predictions so rarely borne out? Harnessing his frustration with these contradictions, Jonathan Schlefer set out to investigate how economists arrive at their opinions.
While economists cloak their views in the aura of science, what they actually do is make assumptions about the world, use those assumptions to build imaginary economies (known as models), and from those models generate conclusions. Their models can be useful or dangerous, and it is surprisingly difficult to tell which is which. Schlefer arms us with an understanding of rival assumptions and models reaching back to Adam Smith and forward to cutting-edge theorists today. Although abstract, mathematical thinking characterizes economists’ work, Schlefer reminds us that economists are unavoidably human. They fall prey to fads and enthusiasms and subscribe to ideologies that shape their assumptions, sometimes in problematic ways.
Schlefer takes up current controversies such as income inequality and the financial crisis, for which he holds economists in large part accountable. Although theorists won international acclaim for creating models that demonstrated the inherent instability of markets, ostensibly practical economists ignored those accepted theories and instead relied on their blind faith in the invisible hand of unregulated enterprise. Schlefer explains how the politics of economics allowed them to do so. The Assumptions Economists Make renders the behavior of economists much more comprehensible, if not less irrational.
Siyasetçilerin ve siyasi partilerin temel faaliyet ve ilgi alanlarından biri, belki de çoğu zaman en önde geleni, “ekonomi”dir (economy). Siyasetçiler, geçmişte iktisat (economics) öğrenimi gördükleri ölçüde, ekonomi ile ilgili konularda oluşturulacak politikaların tasarlanmasında ve/veya tartışmalarda ekonomi ve iktisatçılık hakkındaki bilgi birikimleri ve analitik yeteneklerinden daha geniş biçimde yararlanabilirler. Dahası, “iktisatçı siyasetçiler”in bir bölümü geçmişte “akademik iktisatçı” da (öğretim üyesi veya yardımcısı) olmuş olabilirler. Eğer o dönemde “fildişi kulelerinden” hiç dışarı çıkmadan yaşamadılarsa, bu onları artık üyesi oldukları siyasi parti ve daha da önemlisi, sorunlarına çare üretmeye çalıştıkları toplum açısından çok daha aktif ve yararlı hale getirir.