http://www.econjobrumors.com/ Economics Job Market Rumors Topic: Worst field to be candidate in? en Fri, 10 Sep 2010 19:33:14 +0000 http://www.econjobrumors.com/topic.php?id=687&page=4#post-9787 Fri, 12 Dec 2008 20:48:07 +0000 Anonymous 9787@http://www.econjobrumors.com/ <p>you seem to have a problem of identification, mate. </p> http://www.econjobrumors.com/topic.php?id=687&page=4#post-9786 Fri, 12 Dec 2008 20:46:29 +0000 Anonymous 9786@http://www.econjobrumors.com/ <p>Actually, I always thought the nice guys were the empirical people and the applied theorists were the bullies. </p> http://www.econjobrumors.com/topic.php?id=687&page=4#post-9780 Fri, 12 Dec 2008 20:40:26 +0000 Anonymous 9780@http://www.econjobrumors.com/ <p>from the o.p. of this thread. What I meant was really what fields are having the toughest time relative to expectations? There are never many job openings for theorists, so of course it's rough for them this year, too. But is there a field in your department that is getting, say, 10% of the calls people got last year, while another field is getting 75% of the calls those types got last year? </p> http://www.econjobrumors.com/topic.php?id=687&page=4#post-9778 Fri, 12 Dec 2008 20:40:06 +0000 Anonymous 9778@http://www.econjobrumors.com/ <p>so, if anyone had any doubts still -- the only nice guys are the applied theorist (and nice guys always lose). </p> http://www.econjobrumors.com/topic.php?id=687&page=4#post-9775 Fri, 12 Dec 2008 20:35:24 +0000 Anonymous 9775@http://www.econjobrumors.com/ <p>"But applied theory people get tarred with the same brush, at many schools; applied theorists often get flack from theorier-than-thou people, AND from realisticer-than-thou people."</p> <p>The problem is that most economists are not openminded enough to accept other styles of research. Empirical people tend to be dismissive of theory. Theorists tend to be dismissive of purely empirical work. Both sides tend to be dismissive of people who try to combine both theory and empirical work (the theorists say the theory component isn't very good; the empiricists say the empirical work isn't very good). This is a real problem with the profession. </p> <p>The lesson for people on the job market (I am on the hiring side) is that you need to (a) in your interview and job talk, be clear about what your contribution is. If your contribution is mainly on the empirical side, be sure the theorists know this so they don't solely judge you on your model. (b) As you consider job offers, be sure there is a person or group within your new department that will support you and your style of research. </p> http://www.econjobrumors.com/topic.php?id=687&page=4#post-9769 Fri, 12 Dec 2008 20:28:24 +0000 Anonymous 9769@http://www.econjobrumors.com/ <p>But applied theory people get tarred with the same brush, at many schools; applied theorists often get flack from theorier-than-thou people, AND from realisticer-than-thou people. </p> http://www.econjobrumors.com/topic.php?id=687&page=3#post-9763 Fri, 12 Dec 2008 20:23:52 +0000 Anonymous 9763@http://www.econjobrumors.com/ <p>I think there is a BIG difference between theory and applied theory.</p> <p>the question about "is there any data that can say your model is wrong" only applies to applied theory, as it is applied theory that tries to model features that have an empirical counterpart in the reality.</p> <p>for a theorist that question is simply totally irrelevant, as theory only deals with the formalisation of economic concepts of general and methodological relevance, and not with the modelisation and rationalisation of empirical regularities. </p> http://www.econjobrumors.com/topic.php?id=687&page=3#post-9755 Fri, 12 Dec 2008 20:17:28 +0000 Anonymous 9755@http://www.econjobrumors.com/ <p>If that's my defining trait, then I'm proud to be guilty as charged. </p> http://www.econjobrumors.com/topic.php?id=687&page=3#post-9750 Fri, 12 Dec 2008 20:11:49 +0000 Anonymous 9750@http://www.econjobrumors.com/ <p>If you were not Andy, you would not mind telling you are not. You are Andy and you dont like to lie. </p> http://www.econjobrumors.com/topic.php?id=687&page=3#post-9723 Fri, 12 Dec 2008 19:58:18 +0000 Anonymous 9723@http://www.econjobrumors.com/ <p>"BTW not caring about falsifiability = theorist"</p> <p>Agree. There is nothing wrong with a model itself if the proof is correct. Whether it captures some empirical regularities is another issue. </p>