Still Annoying, Fifty Years Later

By -
The late, great Fritz Machlup wrote an essay on how annoying he found it to see the word 'methodology' (the study of methods) used when what was meant was the simpler, less pretentious 'method' (how something was done). I just ran across an article on the price of General Tso's chicken in Brooklyn where the author talks about the 'methodology' of his survey -- of Chinese restaurant prices!

Comments

  1. Mario Rizzo12:50 PM

    Gene,

    I think about this literally two or three times a WEEK! I can't get Machlup's complaint out of my mind. The distinction between method and methodology is constantly ignored. Courses are given in methodology when then are really courses in methods. However, this is to be expected to some extent because most people don't understand methodology and its methods.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Bob Murphy3:24 PM

    I think about Chinese food two or three times as week, as well.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Woody7:51 PM

    I don't think about Chinese food very often. In fact, I've never tasted General Tso's chicken, though I know a stoner who used it as an excuse in a traffic stop.

    The Darien CT police pulled this person over for driving too slowly. The cop asked the stoner why his eyes were so red. The driver replied, "they put too much pepper in the General Tso's chicken, and I've been rubbing my eyes the whole way home."

    It was an effective method for avoiding a DUI charge.

    ReplyDelete
  4. James Rothfeld11:02 AM

    Where are links to

    a) Machlup's essay
    b) the article with the study.

    I'm serious. Stop being such a tease.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Libertarians, My Libertarians!

By -
Cruel to be kind means that I love you . Because, while I think you are mistaken, your hearts are in the right place -- yes, even you, Silas --  unlike some people . This Breitbart fellow (discussed in the link above), by all appearances, deliberately doctored a video of Shirley Sherrod to make her remarks appear virulently racist, when they had, in fact, the opposite import. I heard that at a recent Austrian conference, some folks were talking about "Callahan's conservative turn." While that description is not entirely inaccurate, I must say that a lot of these people who today call themselves conservative give me the heebie-jeebies.
Read more

"Pre-Galilean" Foolishness

By -
 I am currently reading The Master and His Emissary , which appears to be an excellent book. ("Appears" because I don't know the neuroscience literature well enough to say for sure, yet.) But then on page 186 I find: "Asking cognition, however, to give a perspective on the relationship between cognition and affect is like asking astronomer in the pre-Galilean geocentric world, whether, in his opinion, the sun moves round the earth of the earth around the sun. To ask a question alone would be enough to label one as mad." OK, this is garbage. First of all, it should be pre-Copernican, not pre-Galilean. But much worse is that people have seriously been considering heliocentrism for many centuries before Copernicus. Aristarchus had proposed a heliocentric model in the 4th-century BC. It had generally been considered wrong, but not "mad." (And wrong for scientific reasons: Why, for instance, did we not observe stellar parallax?) And when Copernicus propose
Read more