> "This is why you never, ever take anyone seriously who thinks of society like a model."
Yet that is precisely what classical economic theory has done, for decades! It boggles my mind how long it's taking for that kind of reductionist, simplistic, reality-ignoring "thinking" to mature.
"Reality" is necessarily a model. Your brain doesn't see photons, doesn't touch objects, doesn't respond to audio waves.
If you are sane, then your model must not be subject to your will; therefore it is outside "you" even if within your skull, and performs as a trusted intermediary.
Sure, on that point we're agreed. Our perceptions (distinct from sensory input) are dependent on a conceptual framework / paradigm / model. But I didn't say models were useless, I was pointing out the profound flaw at the heart of typical economic models. Classical economic theory reduces the messy reality of human interaction to a handful of simple pseudo-mathematical axioms, then proceeds to build complicated formulas and algorithms atop this unreliable foundation. It's only quite recently that real-world complexity is (finally!) entering the picture, thanks to things like the Santa Fe Institute. It's reminiscent of the Copernican revolution.
