It would, if you were trying to rigorously systematize your "but how do I choose the system?" But if you refer back to my "programmer deciding which language to start a new project in", you can see how that's not necessary or even very useful.
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
But programmers have this discussion *all the time* productively (well, sometimes ;) ). They do so without a universal theory of what it means to be "best" or "best suited". And it's not purely favoritism or fanboyism.
0 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
that is the entire actual point of this discussion and this philosophical school. first acknowledge that there is no deep agreement, then come up with methods of reasoning that increase utility without requiring deep agreement.
0 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
utility is approximately undefined too tbh :D we [econ tribe, now] gave up on that aeons ago
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @eigenrobot @danlistensto and
wait serious question (I'm not trying to read and understand this thread and its links until AFTER my night of sleep) but what do you think about that paper saying economists are pretty ok modeled as preference utilitarians then?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @SilverVVulpes @danlistensto and
UM unsure of the meaning of that precise term but if it means what I'm guessing it means that's the present consensus, at least in terms of how we model things
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
be happy to chat more later as you like ^^
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.