real-world economics review, issue no. 104
subscribe for freeBook ReviewLars P. Syll
The Poverty of Fictional Storytelling in Mainstream Economics.
Bristol, World Economics Association Books, 2023, 182 pages
ISBN 978 1 911156 63 5
Jesper Jespersen [Roskilde University, Denmark]
Copyright: Jesper Jespersen, 2023

You may post comments on this paper at
http://rwer.wordpress.com/comments-on-rwer-issue-no-104/

Lars Pålsson Syll is professor of social science and associate professor of economic history at
Malmö University. He is likely familiar to readers from his many posts on his popular blog site(which is also carried on the Real-World Economics blog site), his previous book published inthe World Economics Association Book Series, On the use and misuse of theories and models
in mainstream economics (Syll 2016), and for his occasional contributions to Real-World
Economics Review (e.g. Syll 2014).1 Syll has written widely on the continuing relevance ofKeynes, the work of post Keynesians and on MMT, but is perhaps best known for his criticalrealist informed critique of the methodology of mainstream economics, and especially the useof mathematical models and econometrics (see the interview Syll and Morgan 2019).
His new book consists in an introduction (drawn from Syll 2023a), which sets out the maineconomics, followed by six further chapters, each providing a methodological critique of animportant aspect of the mainstream. A couple of quotes from the introduction provide a flavourof the book.
Economic theories always build
consciously or unconsciouslyonmethodological positions. The question is therefore not whether economists
should deal with methodology or not, but rather how it should best be done.
Methodological analysis is both desirable and inevitable in economic science.
(Syll 2023b: 5)
For a realist, it is necessary to try to find assumptions in theories that arepractically relevant and that work and are consistent even in other contexts
and with other known knowledge and practices. Theories should be robust andable to explain studied events by indicating what caused them, not just logicallydeducible. Explanation and prediction of economic phenomena require theory
1 For further information visit: https://mau.se/en/persons/lars.palsson-syll/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lars_P%C3%A5lsson_Syll
https://larspsyll.wordpress.com/ andhttps://rwer.wordpress.com/author/lulapa/

102

real-world economics review, issue no. 104
subscribe for freeconstruction, and seeking event correlations is therefore not enough. One must
generative mechanisms that explain the economic system. (Syll 2023b: 8)
Sometimes it is argued that the use of formal models is good because they canguarantee logical consistency, force explicit assumptions, enable a
concentrated representation, and facilitate communication among
researchers. This may be true, but one should not forget that these advantages
often lead to simplicity and mathematical elegance replacing explanatory
power, that the models give rise to counterintuitive and paradoxical results, andthat the desire for formalization can become an end in itself. (Syll 2023b: 11)
For Syll, the real world economy is open, emergent, complex, and continually changing.
Mainstream economics by contrast typically adopts methods and builds models which assume
a closed system of atomistic individuals (from which one can build up an economy by
how the world is investigated. While he is not anti-mathematics he highlights the simplistic tacit
beliefs in economics (Syll 2023: 13):-been going on for far too long in economics (Syll 2023b: 18). The chapters that follow explore
the highlighted issues and interweave comment on his various prescriptions to help fix themainstream.
The outcome is a sad story for modern economics. Despite its pretensions the mainstream
failed to predict, has failed to adequately explain, and continues to fail to appropriately diagnose
solutions for the major economic crises of the 21st century: from the Dot-Com collapse of 20012, to the financial crisis of 2008-10 and most recently Covid19 and its aftermath. Sylldemonstrates that very little if anything has changed with regard to economic methodology inthe dominant mainstream textbooks and models (theoretical or applied). Accordingly, heconcluded: whether one looks to macroeconomics, econometrics or even game theory, while
concepts have diversified and modelling has developed, the underlying methodologicalproblems have stayed essentially the same.
the absence of methodologicalconsiderations in mainstream economics, which has been fermenting since at least MarkThe Methodology of Economics (Blaug 1980). While Blaug was not 40 years ago as
critical as Syll, he became, as formalism developed in the 1990s, more critical of the overuseof mathematics in economic analysis and fam
Economics has increasingly become an intellectual game played for its own sake and not for(Blaug 2002: 36). Syll, building on insights first set out in Roy
A Realist Theory of Science (Economics103

real-world economics review, issue no. 104
subscribe for freeand Reality (Lawson 1997) and many subsequent works, is part of a long tradition of criticism
of deductivism as the basis of theory and as a guide for policy.
H, one cannot avoid wondering how it is that modern mathematical
economics still holds such a dominant position in terms of textbooks and economic practice.
This is especially so if you consider two things:
First, if one peruses the shelves of economic literature of any major bookstore (in London oreven Copenhagen), it is clearly books written by dissenting economists which dominate theshelves devoted to the general interested reader: Ha-Joon Chang, Yanis Varoufakis, RobertSkidelsky, Mariana Mazzucato, Stephanie Kelton, Kate Raworth etc. Many of the more popular(the textbook shelves are dominated by mainstream works. Pause for thought!
Second, during all of the major 21st century crises mainstream models and predictions havetypically failed and the policy prescriptions built from them have often been suspended bypolicymakers, forcing them to improvise. This has happened without widespread objection frommainstream economists. It is odd that the mainstream seems so unaffected by this and evenodder that they continue to offer advice and analysis from the very same toolbox that failed ina number of fatal cases. Pause for thought!

important guide to the second.

References
Bhaskar, R. (1975) A realist theory of science. Leeds: Leeds Books.
Blaug, Mark (1980) The Methodology of Economics: or how economists explain. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
((Facts and Fiction in Economics:
Models, Realism and Social Construction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Jespersen, J. (2009), Macroeconomic Methodology: a Post-Keynesian Perspective. Cheltenham: EdwardElgar.
Lawson, T. (1997) Economics and Reality. London: Routledge.
Syll(Real-World Economics Review,69: 36-43. http://www.paecon.net/PAEReview/issue69/Syll69.pdf

Syll, L. P. (2016) On the use and misuse of theories and models in mainstream economics. London: World
Economics Association Books.
(Real-World Economics
Review, 103: 61-83. http://www.paecon.net/PAEReview/issue103/Syll103.pdf
Syll, L. P. (2023b) Mainstream Economics: The Poverty of Fictional Storytelling. Bristol: Worlds
Economics Association(Real-World Economics Review, 88: 60-75.
http://www.paecon.net/PAEReview/issue88/SyllMorgan88.pdf

104real-world economics review, issue no. 104
subscribe for free

Author contact: jesperj@ruc.dk___________________________SUGGESTED CITATION:
Jesper Jespersen Review of Lars P
The Poverty of Fictional Storytelling in Mainstream Economic , real-world
economics review, issue no. 104, 3 July 2023, pp. 102 105,
http://www.paecon.net/PAEReview/issue104/Jespersen_Review

You may post and read comments on this paper at http://rwer.wordpress.com/comments-on-rwerissue-no-104/

105