Recently Paul Krugman wrote a smart piece decrying the proliferation of appeal to authority arguments which he closed with the following:
But in any case, this is never an appropriate way to argue — least of all at a time like this, when events have strongly suggested that a lot of work in economics these past few decades, very much including the work on which these guys’ reputations are based, was on the wrong track.
Do I do this myself? Probably on occasion, when I don’t catch myself. But I try not to. I would say that commenters who begin with “I can’t believe that a Nobel prize winner doesn’t understand that …” might want to think a bit harder; mostly, though not always, I have actually thought whatever you’re saying through, and the obvious fallacy you think you’ve found, isn’t. But “Me big famous economist, you nobody” is not a valid argument.
(See John Quiggin and Noah Smith for more on the incident that prompted this)
I'm also always on the lookout for excuses to bring in a favorite video clip, like this one from Whose Line Is It Anyway which provides a great example of the form and nicely shows the respect and affection the cast feel for Caesar.
Just to be absolutely clear, I was:
1. Looking for an excuse to use the "Nobel Prize winner" line in an obviously silly and trivial context;
2. Post the Caesar clip;
3. Link to yet another sharp and well-written Krugman post.
In other words, it was a joke.
(And for the record, if I make a disparaging comment about Felix Salmon followed a Kovacs clip, I'll be joking then too.)
No comments:
Post a Comment