After Piketty is published by Harvard University Press.
Anti-Piketty is published by Cato.
In case you miss the significance, both are academic books, but only the one that takes the left-wing slant is published by a university press.
12 thoughts on “Road to Sociology Watch”
I never heard a good explanation for why Piety caught fire. The reasons I heard were 1) progressive confirmation bias, 2) Rigorous research of 3)Somewhat novel genealogical records.
Piketty, that is, but I’m not clear on piety either now that I mention it.
I think it was his easily understood formula (?), r>g.
An obviously erroneous formula, at that. |r| > g would make sense, as when g is negative, r tends to be more negative.
Piketty cherry picked data to support a bad hypothesis when a slew of obviously superior hypotheses better explain even his cherry picker data. He simply is not a very good economist; he owes his popularity to the tempora et mores.
University presses publish plenty of libertarian stuff. Brian Caplan’s Myth comes to mind. Bleeding heart Libertarians have a lot of work on University presses too. Libertarians are over-represented in academia compared to the general population.
You don’t think that only orogressive/liberals are iver-represented?
I decided to go with my own blog, rather than return to EconLog, because I want to have total control over the blog content. I want to model a very particular style of discourse, as indicated by the tag line “taking the most charitable view of those who disagree.” In June, I wrote
Suppose we look at writing on issues where people tend to hold strong opinions that fit with their ideology. Such writing can
(a) attempt to open the minds of people on the opposite side as the author
(b) attempt to open minds of people on the same side as the author
(c) attempt to close minds of people on the same side as the author
So, think about it. Wouldn’t you classify most op-eds and blog posts as (c)? Isn’t that sort of pathetic?
My goal is to avoid (c). I will try to keep the posts here free of put-downs, snark, cheap shots, straw-man arguments, and taking the least charitable interpretation of what others say. So, if what you most enjoyed about my past blogging efforts were the put-downs, be prepared for disappointment with this incarnation.
I take it this is not longer the purpose of the blog?
You would have him whistle past the grave yard? Sometimes shouting “y’all are dead!” IS the most charitable thing.
The university press in question has a bit more tradition and reputation in terms of disseminating knowledge, as opposed to the academic inclination from the other institution.
It researches about the high income of France led to the book of High incomes in France in the 20th Century, Grasset, 2001. Which was based on a survey of statistical series covering the whole of the 20th century, built from data from the fiscal services (particularly income tax declarations).
What is the matter with you people?
Pro Picketty and anti should be in the exact same book.
“After Piketty: The Agenda for Economics and Inequality”
I never heard a good explanation for why Piety caught fire. The reasons I heard were 1) progressive confirmation bias, 2) Rigorous research of 3)Somewhat novel genealogical records.
Piketty, that is, but I’m not clear on piety either now that I mention it.
I think it was his easily understood formula (?), r>g.
An obviously erroneous formula, at that. |r| > g would make sense, as when g is negative, r tends to be more negative.
Piketty cherry picked data to support a bad hypothesis when a slew of obviously superior hypotheses better explain even his cherry picker data. He simply is not a very good economist; he owes his popularity to the tempora et mores.
University presses publish plenty of libertarian stuff. Brian Caplan’s Myth comes to mind. Bleeding heart Libertarians have a lot of work on University presses too. Libertarians are over-represented in academia compared to the general population.
You don’t think that only orogressive/liberals are iver-represented?
I take it this is not longer the purpose of the blog?
You would have him whistle past the grave yard? Sometimes shouting “y’all are dead!” IS the most charitable thing.
The university press in question has a bit more tradition and reputation in terms of disseminating knowledge, as opposed to the academic inclination from the other institution.
It researches about the high income of France led to the book of High incomes in France in the 20th Century, Grasset, 2001. Which was based on a survey of statistical series covering the whole of the 20th century, built from data from the fiscal services (particularly income tax declarations).
What is the matter with you people?
Pro Picketty and anti should be in the exact same book.
“After Piketty: The Agenda for Economics and Inequality”
“Agenda”?