180126 SE Modelling in Economics (2022W)
Continuous assessment of course work
Labels
MIXED
Summary
Registration/Deregistration
Note: The time of your registration within the registration period has no effect on the allocation of places (no first come, first served).
- Registration is open from Mo 12.09.2022 09:00 to Mo 19.09.2022 10:00
- Registration is open from Fr 23.09.2022 09:00 to Fr 30.09.2022 10:00
- Deregistration possible until Mo 31.10.2022 23:59
Registration information is available for each group.
Groups
Group 1
max. 15 participants
Language: English
LMS: Moodle
Lecturers
Classes (iCal) - next class is marked with N
Tuesday
11.10.
11:30 - 13:00
Hörsaal. 2H NIG 2.Stock
Tuesday
18.10.
11:30 - 13:00
Hörsaal. 2H NIG 2.Stock
Tuesday
25.10.
11:30 - 13:00
Hörsaal. 2H NIG 2.Stock
Tuesday
08.11.
11:30 - 13:00
Hörsaal. 2H NIG 2.Stock
Tuesday
15.11.
11:30 - 13:00
Hörsaal. 2H NIG 2.Stock
Tuesday
22.11.
11:30 - 13:00
Hörsaal. 2H NIG 2.Stock
Tuesday
29.11.
11:30 - 13:00
Hörsaal. 2H NIG 2.Stock
Tuesday
06.12.
11:30 - 13:00
Hörsaal. 2H NIG 2.Stock
Tuesday
13.12.
11:30 - 13:00
Hörsaal. 2H NIG 2.Stock
Tuesday
10.01.
11:30 - 13:00
Hörsaal. 2H NIG 2.Stock
Tuesday
17.01.
11:30 - 13:00
Hörsaal. 2H NIG 2.Stock
Tuesday
24.01.
11:30 - 13:00
Hörsaal. 2H NIG 2.Stock
Tuesday
31.01.
11:30 - 13:00
Hörsaal. 2H NIG 2.Stock
Aims, contents and method of the course
Assessment and permitted materials
Active participation (20%), online discussion (20%), chairing a class (10%), and a presentation and a thesis-oriented essay (50%).
Work on the final essay is organized as follows. A student writes an abstract of the essay, and prepares a presentation of it, to be presented in either of the last classes of the course. These proposals are uploaded to Moodle one week before the presentation. On the basis of the feedback given in the discussion, the essay of at most 2000 words is written.
Work on the final essay is organized as follows. A student writes an abstract of the essay, and prepares a presentation of it, to be presented in either of the last classes of the course. These proposals are uploaded to Moodle one week before the presentation. On the basis of the feedback given in the discussion, the essay of at most 2000 words is written.
Minimum requirements and assessment criteria
Active participation in the seminars: You need to attend to at least 8 classes and participate actively in the discussion. In case you cannot attend to the class, you need to compensate for your absence by an additional assignment. NB: If you have more absences than one, and you have serious medical or other reasons to excuse your absence, please contact the TA as soon as possible.
Readings: You have to prepare for the classes by reading the readings well enough to be able to summarize and discuss their basic argument(s).
Online discussion: You have to submit a question on each of the readings to the Moodle. The questions should include a short justification of no more than 100 words. The question should be of a general/ methodological/ philosophical nature, and not any factual question that could be addressed by a google search. You have to send a question on the readings to the Moodle by noon on Monday, and also comment on at least one question sent by some other student by 5 pm on Monday. You are also expected to familiarize yourself with all the questions of the other students ahead of the class.
Co-chairing: Each student needs to co-chair one class. This involves a) reading the Moodle discussion and giving a short overview of the online discussion, and b) choosing and reformulating 2-3 questions on readings, at least one question/reading, for further discussion in break-out groups. The co-chairs also need to provide the reformulated chosen questions in a written form to be handed in the class to the students (max. 100 words/ question), and to moderate the discussion of those questions in class. For the moderation to succeed, it is important to include all the students into the discussion!
A thesis-oriented essay in English on a freely chosen topic (2000 words, excluding references), based on the topics discussed in the class. The essay should contain at least 5 references, of which at least 3 should be to articles/books not part of the course readings. The more specific instructions will be given later. In referencing, use the Chicago Author-Date style. https://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/tools_citationguide/citation-guide-2.html
Readings: You have to prepare for the classes by reading the readings well enough to be able to summarize and discuss their basic argument(s).
Online discussion: You have to submit a question on each of the readings to the Moodle. The questions should include a short justification of no more than 100 words. The question should be of a general/ methodological/ philosophical nature, and not any factual question that could be addressed by a google search. You have to send a question on the readings to the Moodle by noon on Monday, and also comment on at least one question sent by some other student by 5 pm on Monday. You are also expected to familiarize yourself with all the questions of the other students ahead of the class.
Co-chairing: Each student needs to co-chair one class. This involves a) reading the Moodle discussion and giving a short overview of the online discussion, and b) choosing and reformulating 2-3 questions on readings, at least one question/reading, for further discussion in break-out groups. The co-chairs also need to provide the reformulated chosen questions in a written form to be handed in the class to the students (max. 100 words/ question), and to moderate the discussion of those questions in class. For the moderation to succeed, it is important to include all the students into the discussion!
A thesis-oriented essay in English on a freely chosen topic (2000 words, excluding references), based on the topics discussed in the class. The essay should contain at least 5 references, of which at least 3 should be to articles/books not part of the course readings. The more specific instructions will be given later. In referencing, use the Chicago Author-Date style. https://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/tools_citationguide/citation-guide-2.html
Examination topics
See reading material
Reading list
Rodrik, Dani. 2016. Economics Rules: The Rights and Wrongs of the Dismal Science. New York: W.W. Norton & Company. Chapters 1-2 (pages 13-49)
Akerlof, George A. 1970. “The Market for 'Lemons': Quality Uncertainty and the Market Mechanism.” Quarterly Journal of Economics. The MIT Press. 84 (3): 488-500.
Schelling, Thomas C. 1971 “Dynamic Models of Segregation.” Journal of Mathematical Sociology. 1: 143-86.
Cartwright, Nancy. 1999. “The Vanity of Rigour in Economics: Theoretical Models and Galilean Experiments.” Discussion paper series 43/99. Centre for Philosophy of Natural and Social Science.
Pancs, Romans, and Nicolaas J. Vriend. 2007. “Schelling’s Spatial Proximity Model of Segregation Revisited.” Journal of Public Economics 91 (1): 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2006.03.008.
Sugden, Robert. 2000. “Credible Worlds: The Status of Theoretical Models in Economics.” Journal of Economic Methodology 7 (1): 1–31. https://doi.org/10.1080/135017800362220.Godfrey-Smith, Peter. 2006. “The Strategy of Model-Based Science.” Biology and Philosophy 21: 725-740.Suárez, Maurizio (2010). “Scientific Representation.” Blackwell’s Philosophy Compass 5 (1): 91-101
Elgin, Catherine Z. 2004. “True enough.” Philosophical Issues, 14: 113–131.Weisberg, Michael. 2007. “Three Kinds of Idealization.” The Journal of Philosophy 104 (12): 639–59. https://doi.org/10.5840/jphil20071041240.
Knuuttila, Tarja, and Mary S. Morgan. 2019. “De-idealization: No Easy Reversals.” Philosophy of Science 86 (4): 641–61. https://doi.org/10.1086/704975.
Akerlof, George A. 1970. “The Market for 'Lemons': Quality Uncertainty and the Market Mechanism.” Quarterly Journal of Economics. The MIT Press. 84 (3): 488-500.
Schelling, Thomas C. 1971 “Dynamic Models of Segregation.” Journal of Mathematical Sociology. 1: 143-86.
Cartwright, Nancy. 1999. “The Vanity of Rigour in Economics: Theoretical Models and Galilean Experiments.” Discussion paper series 43/99. Centre for Philosophy of Natural and Social Science.
Pancs, Romans, and Nicolaas J. Vriend. 2007. “Schelling’s Spatial Proximity Model of Segregation Revisited.” Journal of Public Economics 91 (1): 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2006.03.008.
Sugden, Robert. 2000. “Credible Worlds: The Status of Theoretical Models in Economics.” Journal of Economic Methodology 7 (1): 1–31. https://doi.org/10.1080/135017800362220.Godfrey-Smith, Peter. 2006. “The Strategy of Model-Based Science.” Biology and Philosophy 21: 725-740.Suárez, Maurizio (2010). “Scientific Representation.” Blackwell’s Philosophy Compass 5 (1): 91-101
Elgin, Catherine Z. 2004. “True enough.” Philosophical Issues, 14: 113–131.Weisberg, Michael. 2007. “Three Kinds of Idealization.” The Journal of Philosophy 104 (12): 639–59. https://doi.org/10.5840/jphil20071041240.
Knuuttila, Tarja, and Mary S. Morgan. 2019. “De-idealization: No Easy Reversals.” Philosophy of Science 86 (4): 641–61. https://doi.org/10.1086/704975.
Group 2
max. 15 participants
Language: English
LMS: Moodle
Lecturers
Classes (iCal) - next class is marked with N
Tuesday
11.10.
11:30 - 13:00
Hörsaal. 2H NIG 2.Stock
Tuesday
18.10.
11:30 - 13:00
Hörsaal. 2H NIG 2.Stock
Tuesday
25.10.
11:30 - 13:00
Hörsaal. 2H NIG 2.Stock
Tuesday
08.11.
11:30 - 13:00
Hörsaal. 2H NIG 2.Stock
Tuesday
15.11.
11:30 - 13:00
Hörsaal. 2H NIG 2.Stock
Tuesday
22.11.
11:30 - 13:00
Hörsaal. 2H NIG 2.Stock
Tuesday
29.11.
11:30 - 13:00
Hörsaal. 2H NIG 2.Stock
Tuesday
06.12.
11:30 - 13:00
Hörsaal. 2H NIG 2.Stock
Tuesday
13.12.
11:30 - 13:00
Hörsaal. 2H NIG 2.Stock
Tuesday
10.01.
11:30 - 13:00
Hörsaal. 2H NIG 2.Stock
Tuesday
17.01.
11:30 - 13:00
Hörsaal. 2H NIG 2.Stock
Tuesday
24.01.
11:30 - 13:00
Hörsaal. 2H NIG 2.Stock
Tuesday
31.01.
11:30 - 13:00
Hörsaal. 2H NIG 2.Stock
Aims, contents and method of the course
An important question in the philosophy of economics is how economic models relate to the world we live in. Clearly, economic models only reflect at best some of the factors that are relevant for the economic systems of interest. This then raises important questions, such as:• Do economic models provide useful insight on how the economy functions? How do they provide such insights?
• How do economic models represent, explain or predict?
• How can we assess the fruitfulness of economic modeling?
• To what extent is economics different from other natural and/or social sciences?This course addresses the aforementioned questions, both from the perspectives of economics and philosophy of science. The main goal is to get acquainted with different philosophical and methodological accounts of economic modeling, and to use them to get a better understanding of the different roles models play in economics.
• How do economic models represent, explain or predict?
• How can we assess the fruitfulness of economic modeling?
• To what extent is economics different from other natural and/or social sciences?This course addresses the aforementioned questions, both from the perspectives of economics and philosophy of science. The main goal is to get acquainted with different philosophical and methodological accounts of economic modeling, and to use them to get a better understanding of the different roles models play in economics.
Assessment and permitted materials
Careful reading of assigned literature
Active participation in the seminars
Online discussion in Moodle
Co-chairing: Each student needs to co-chair one class.
Active participation in the seminars
Online discussion in Moodle
Co-chairing: Each student needs to co-chair one class.
Minimum requirements and assessment criteria
Active participation (10%), online discussion (10%), chairing a class (10%), and a presentation and a thesis-oriented essay (70%). All aforementioned components of the course have to be fulfilled for the successful completion of the grade. One unexcused absence is permitted.Grading table
1 – (excellent) 90 – 100 points
2 – (good) 81 – 89 points
3 – (satisfactory) 71 – 80 points
4 – (sufficient) 61 – 70 points
5 – (insufficient) 0 – 60 points
1 – (excellent) 90 – 100 points
2 – (good) 81 – 89 points
3 – (satisfactory) 71 – 80 points
4 – (sufficient) 61 – 70 points
5 – (insufficient) 0 – 60 points
Examination topics
The course has a final essay in English, to be submitted after the course. The instructions are given in the syllabus, Moodle, and in the class.
Work on the final essay is organized as follows. A student writes an abstract of the essay, and prepares a presentation of it, to be presented in either of the last classes of the course. These proposals are uploaded to Moodle one week before the presentation. On the basis of the feedback given in the discussion, the essay of 2000-2500 words is written.
Work on the final essay is organized as follows. A student writes an abstract of the essay, and prepares a presentation of it, to be presented in either of the last classes of the course. These proposals are uploaded to Moodle one week before the presentation. On the basis of the feedback given in the discussion, the essay of 2000-2500 words is written.
Reading list
Rodrik, Dani. 2016. Economics Rules: The Rights and Wrongs of the Dismal Science. New York: W.W. Norton & Company. Chapters 1-2 (pages 13-49)Schelling, Thomas C. 1978. Micromotives and Macrobehavior, chapter 5: 137-56.Pancs, Romans, and Nicolaas J. Vriend. 2007. “Schelling’s Spatial Proximity Model of Segregation Revisited.” Journal of Public Economics 91 (1): 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpubeco.2006.03.008.Sugden, Robert. 2000. “Credible Worlds: The Status of Theoretical Models in Economics.” Journal of Economic Methodology 7 (1): 1–31. https://doi.org/10.1080/135017800362220.Pissarides, Chris. 1992. ”Loss of Skill During Unemployment and the Persistence of Unemployment Shocks.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 107: 1371-1391.Cartwright, Nancy. 1999. “The Vanity of Rigour in Economics: Theoretical Models and Galilean Experiments.” Discussion paper series 43/99. Centre for Philosophy of Natural and Social Science.Weisberg, Michael. 2007. “Three Kinds of Idealization.” The Journal of Philosophy 104 (12): 639–59. https://doi.org/10.5840/jphil20071041240.Knuuttila, Tarja, and Mary S. Morgan. 2019. “De-idealization: No Easy Reversals.” Philosophy of Science 86 (4): 641–61. https://doi.org/10.1086/704975.Godfrey-Smith, Peter. 2006. “The Strategy of Model-Based Science.” Biology and Philosophy 21: 725-740.Teller, Paul. 2001. Twilight of the Perfect Model Model. Erkenntnis 55: 393–415.Elgin, Catherine Z. (2004). “True Enough.” Philosophical Issues, 14: 113–131.Solow, Robert M. 1997. “How Did Economics Get That Way and What Way Did It Get?” Daedalus 126/1: 39–58. http://www.jstor.org/stable/20027408.
Association in the course directory
Last modified: Tu 11.10.2022 18:09
• Do economic models provide useful insight on how the economy functions? How do they provide such insights?
• How do economic models represent, explain or predict?
• How can we assess the fruitfulness of economic modeling?
• To what extent is economics different from other natural and/or social sciences?This course addresses the aforementioned questions, both from the perspectives of economics and philosophy of science. The main goal is to get acquainted with different philosophical and methodological accounts of economic modeling, and to use them to get a better understanding of the different roles models play in economics.