The "devalue and dismiss" fallacy, methodological pluralism, and DSGE models - Marginal REVOLUTION

One of the most common fallacies in the economics blogosphere — and elsewhere — is what I call “devalue and dismiss.”  That is, a writer will come up with some critique of another argument, let us call that argument X, and then dismiss that argument altogether.  Afterwards, the thought processes of the dismisser run unencumbered by any consideration of X, which after all is what dismissal means.  Sometimes “X” will be a person or a source rather than an argument, of course. The “devalue” part of this chain may well be justified.  But it should lead to “devalue and downgrade,” rather than “devalue and dismiss.” “Devalue and dismiss” is much easier of course, because there then will be fewer constraints on what one can believe and with what level of certainty.  “Devalue and downgrade” keeps a lot of balls in the air and that can be tiresome and also unsatisfying, especially for those of us trained to look for neat, intuitive explanations. Enter DSGE models.  There are plenty of good argu

saved by

• Charlie Wang