Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Overcoming Bias Commenter's avatar

I liked the podcast but I think that I would have liked it more had you talked more.

Expand full comment
Overcoming Bias Commenter's avatar

Great discussion on: how do we know that 'we know'? I congratulate Russell and Robin for such an honest exposition of their own doubts and theories. The bottom line for me: it is good to be skeptical as a drive to always seek for truth, Though, I am humble too to recognize that as humans, the closest we are to truth is only in the process of seeking it. Just sometimes a path-breaking discovery comes along.The limits and fallibility of the human reason was emphasized by both of you. Russ with a more pronounced hayekian 'bias'.I agree with Robin regarding that the 'conservative' rigor of the academic process is necessary for newcomers or young scholars. On the other hand, that very same process might be not rewarding 'marginal' innovation from within. To give an example: Picasso's first paintings fall into the classical category very realist. He mastered that technique. But then he departed from it to offer us cubism and the like. That kind of innovation should also happen in science.Speaking of bias, our methods to collect data, to falsify a theory/model. to build a model/theory might also be responsible for some disagreement in topics such as the current financial mess.Now, it is interesting that it was also the events of the Great Depression, and the Stagflation, that ignited a re-examination by economists of our own methods and theories. This has happened in a period of less than a 100 years. So, maybe 100 or 200 years from now some economists might finally provide a better theoretical understanding of all these events. And I would not be surprised if that discovery comes at a cost of giving up some of the 'approaches' we 'conservatively' follow and spread these days.

Expand full comment
4 more comments...

No posts