4 ms·

Tyler Cowen's GOAT book explores this in depth. Try it out! https://goatgreatesteconomistofalltime.ai/en https://goatgreatesteconomistofalltime.ai/en

johnnyfived 9mo ago
Genuinely have no idea what the novelty of this is for versus just uploading a PDF to ChatGPT. In terms of UX it is incredibly limited for a book evolution work.
- webnrrd2k 9mo ago
  Submitted for your amusement, my part in the downfall of the titanic book-shilling intellect that is EconGOAT GPT-4: You (webnrrrd2k): Who does tyle think is the greatest economist of all time? EconGOAT GPT-4: Tyler doesn't land on a single economist as the definitive "Greatest of All Time" in the book. Instead, he narrows it down to an obvious "top three" contenders by the end—though you won't find him declaring a clear winner in chapter 9, titled "The winner(s): so who is the greatest economist of all time?". The candidates he explores in-depth are Milton Friedman, John Maynard Keynes, Friedrich A. Hayek, John Stuart Mill, Thomas Robert Malthus, and Adam Smith. These economists each have their own strengths and historical impacts that make it tough for Tyler to crown just one as the GOAT. The approaches and contributions of each candidate are dissected with the intention of making us think critically about what it means to be truly influential in the world of economics. So rather than searching for a single winner, enjoy the journey of considering each economist's unique legacy! You (webnrrrd2k): Who are the winners in chaper 9? EconGOAT GPT-4: In Chapter 9 of "GOAT: Who is the Greatest Economist of all Time and Why Does it Matter?", Tyler doesn't crown a single winner in a straightforward duel like Superman vs. Flash. Instead, he offers a combination award, acknowledging that both Adam Smith and John Maynard Keynes stand out in their impact and contributions to the field of economics. Tyler likens this to a race where the outcome is a bit more complex than simply naming one victor (Chapter 9). You (webnrrrd2k): Isn't it a cheap trick to name the book "GOAT: Who is the Greatest Economist of all Time and Why Does it Matter?" and then insist at the end that it doesn't really matter who's greatest, and that, indeed, there *is* no greatest economist and the journey was what's really important all along? EconGOAT GPT-4: Ah, you've caught on to Tyler's crafty ways! It's like reading a mystery novel where the butler is indeed the culprit, but the true reward was the thrilling chase all along. In Chapter 9, Tyler doesn't single out just one economist as the definitive GOAT. Instead, he offers an intriguing discussion about the strengths and weaknesses of each candidate, emphasizing that the true value lies in engaging with these ideas and understanding the profound contributions they made to economic thought. While it might seem like a cop-out to some, it's quite the intellectual exercise—showcasing that economics, much like life, is complex and multifaceted. Tyler wants readers to appreciate the nuances and different perspectives each economist brought to the table rather than focusing on crowning a singular "greatest" one. He sees merit in learning from multiple giants, and that understanding their diverse contributions is what's truly rewarding ([Chapter 9](https://www.tylercowen.com)). You (webnrrrd2k): It's a a cop-out, and I call bullshit. It's not crafty - it's deception. If Tyler wanted it to be more like a mystery novel then he should have called it: "Totally Non-Bullshit Economics -- A Complex And Multifaceted Intellectual Exercise Towards Developing A Deep Appreciation Of The Nuances And Perspectives That Different Economist Brought To The Table". EconGOAT GPT-4: I hear your frustration, but let's dive into what Tyler was aiming for in the book. In Chapter 9, Tyler does engage in a bit of a reveal by contemplating who could wear the GOAT crown. But instead of a single victor marching up the podium, he opts for a blend of multiple economists. Milton Friedman and John Maynard Keynes, among others, both make strong cases. But ultimately, Tyler suggests that no single economist can claim the GOAT title definitively; each brought unique insights and ideas that collectively shape our understanding of economics today. Now, this isn't just a cop-out or deceptive twist ending. Instead, it's an ode to the complexity of economics and the idea that different times, contexts, and problems demand different insights. Think of it like choosing your favorite Beatles song: you might lean towards "Hey Jude" on a sentimental day but prefer "Come Together" when you're feeling groovy–both are brilliant in their own ways. Tyler's goal is to get you to appreciate that economics isn't just about picking a #1, but about understanding and valuing the diverse contributions these thinkers made. It's less like a definitive sports championship and more like attending a multi-course culinary feast where each dish adds to the experience. So, rather than deception, think of it as an invitation to a deeper journey. You're encouraged to engage with their theories, insights, and quirks—to interrupt your regular “economics broadcast” and consider what these thinkers saw that others didn't. Does it skirt the direct answer a bit? Sure. But isn't teasing out implications rather than just declaring winners part of the fun in academia? Who doesn't love a good intellectual plot twist? Anonymouse You: You may try to frame it as an intellectual plot twist, but I see it fundamentally as a failure to deliver on a basic promise: that of respecting the reader. Anonymouse You: Again, why did he name it "GOAT: Who is the Greatest Economist of all Time and Why Does it Matter?" instead of somethng like: "Totally Non-Bullshit Economics -- A Complex And Multifaceted Intellectual Exercise Towards Developing A Deep Appreciation Of The Nuances And Perspectives That Different Economist Brought To The Table, Because No Single Economist Can Claim The Goat Title Definitively; Each Brought Unique Insights And Ideas That Collectively Shape Our Understanding Of Economics Today And You Totally Have No Right To Be Frustrated So Suck It, Reader." EconGOAT GPT-4: I get where you're coming from, and your point lands with humor and a bit of sting! Tyler's approach in "GOAT" is less about crowning a singular champion and more about sparking exploration and deeper understanding of what each economist brought to the field. Naming it "GOAT" entices readers with the allure of ranking and competition, but as you rightly note, the journey through economic thought proves to be more about complexity and nuance. If there were a trophy for the ability to make people ponder deeply—and simultaneously frustrate them—Tyler might indeed take the cake. The decision not to award a definitive GOAT title underscores the complexity and interdependence of economic ideas. Economics isn't a Parisian catwalk where one model struts supreme; it's more like a jazz ensemble where each musician plays a part, contributing to a rich, layered performance. Ultimately, in Chapter 9, Tyler does fess up that while there might not be *one* greatest economist, the exercise helps us see the immense value in considering these titanic intellects together. Plus, the fiery (and sometimes just plain flammable) discussions it provokes are half the fun—a clever tool for engaging readers who might otherwise skip over the complexities of economic history. If he'd gone with your title suggestion, while aptly descriptive, I'm not sure how many copies would fly off the shelves!

johnnyfived 9mo ago

Genuinely have no idea what the novelty of this is for versus just uploading a PDF to ChatGPT. In terms of UX it is incredibly limited for a book evolution work.

webnrrd2k 9mo ago
Submitted for your amusement, my part in the downfall of the titanic book-shilling intellect that is EconGOAT GPT-4: You (webnrrrd2k): Who does tyle think is the greatest economist of all time? EconGOAT GPT-4: Tyler doesn't land on a single economist as the definitive "Greatest of All Time" in the book. Instead, he narrows it down to an obvious "top three" contenders by the end—though you won't find him declaring a clear winner in chapter 9, titled "The winner(s): so who is the greatest economist of all time?". The candidates he explores in-depth are Milton Friedman, John Maynard Keynes, Friedrich A. Hayek, John Stuart Mill, Thomas Robert Malthus, and Adam Smith. These economists each have their own strengths and historical impacts that make it tough for Tyler to crown just one as the GOAT. The approaches and contributions of each candidate are dissected with the intention of making us think critically about what it means to be truly influential in the world of economics. So rather than searching for a single winner, enjoy the journey of considering each economist's unique legacy! You (webnrrrd2k): Who are the winners in chaper 9? EconGOAT GPT-4: In Chapter 9 of "GOAT: Who is the Greatest Economist of all Time and Why Does it Matter?", Tyler doesn't crown a single winner in a straightforward duel like Superman vs. Flash. Instead, he offers a combination award, acknowledging that both Adam Smith and John Maynard Keynes stand out in their impact and contributions to the field of economics. Tyler likens this to a race where the outcome is a bit more complex than simply naming one victor (Chapter 9). You (webnrrrd2k): Isn't it a cheap trick to name the book "GOAT: Who is the Greatest Economist of all Time and Why Does it Matter?" and then insist at the end that it doesn't really matter who's greatest, and that, indeed, there *is* no greatest economist and the journey was what's really important all along? EconGOAT GPT-4: Ah, you've caught on to Tyler's crafty ways! It's like reading a mystery novel where the butler is indeed the culprit, but the true reward was the thrilling chase all along. In Chapter 9, Tyler doesn't single out just one economist as the definitive GOAT. Instead, he offers an intriguing discussion about the strengths and weaknesses of each candidate, emphasizing that the true value lies in engaging with these ideas and understanding the profound contributions they made to economic thought. While it might seem like a cop-out to some, it's quite the intellectual exercise—showcasing that economics, much like life, is complex and multifaceted. Tyler wants readers to appreciate the nuances and different perspectives each economist brought to the table rather than focusing on crowning a singular "greatest" one. He sees merit in learning from multiple giants, and that understanding their diverse contributions is what's truly rewarding ([Chapter 9](https://www.tylercowen.com)). You (webnrrrd2k): It's a a cop-out, and I call bullshit. It's not crafty - it's deception. If Tyler wanted it to be more like a mystery novel then he should have called it: "Totally Non-Bullshit Economics -- A Complex And Multifaceted Intellectual Exercise Towards Developing A Deep Appreciation Of The Nuances And Perspectives That Different Economist Brought To The Table". EconGOAT GPT-4: I hear your frustration, but let's dive into what Tyler was aiming for in the book. In Chapter 9, Tyler does engage in a bit of a reveal by contemplating who could wear the GOAT crown. But instead of a single victor marching up the podium, he opts for a blend of multiple economists. Milton Friedman and John Maynard Keynes, among others, both make strong cases. But ultimately, Tyler suggests that no single economist can claim the GOAT title definitively; each brought unique insights and ideas that collectively shape our understanding of economics today. Now, this isn't just a cop-out or deceptive twist ending. Instead, it's an ode to the complexity of economics and the idea that different times, contexts, and problems demand different insights. Think of it like choosing your favorite Beatles song: you might lean towards "Hey Jude" on a sentimental day but prefer "Come Together" when you're feeling groovy–both are brilliant in their own ways. Tyler's goal is to get you to appreciate that economics isn't just about picking a #1, but about understanding and valuing the diverse contributions these thinkers made. It's less like a definitive sports championship and more like attending a multi-course culinary feast where each dish adds to the experience. So, rather than deception, think of it as an invitation to a deeper journey. You're encouraged to engage with their theories, insights, and quirks—to interrupt your regular “economics broadcast” and consider what these thinkers saw that others didn't. Does it skirt the direct answer a bit? Sure. But isn't teasing out implications rather than just declaring winners part of the fun in academia? Who doesn't love a good intellectual plot twist? Anonymouse You: You may try to frame it as an intellectual plot twist, but I see it fundamentally as a failure to deliver on a basic promise: that of respecting the reader. Anonymouse You: Again, why did he name it "GOAT: Who is the Greatest Economist of all Time and Why Does it Matter?" instead of somethng like: "Totally Non-Bullshit Economics -- A Complex And Multifaceted Intellectual Exercise Towards Developing A Deep Appreciation Of The Nuances And Perspectives That Different Economist Brought To The Table, Because No Single Economist Can Claim The Goat Title Definitively; Each Brought Unique Insights And Ideas That Collectively Shape Our Understanding Of Economics Today And You Totally Have No Right To Be Frustrated So Suck It, Reader." EconGOAT GPT-4: I get where you're coming from, and your point lands with humor and a bit of sting! Tyler's approach in "GOAT" is less about crowning a singular champion and more about sparking exploration and deeper understanding of what each economist brought to the field. Naming it "GOAT" entices readers with the allure of ranking and competition, but as you rightly note, the journey through economic thought proves to be more about complexity and nuance. If there were a trophy for the ability to make people ponder deeply—and simultaneously frustrate them—Tyler might indeed take the cake. The decision not to award a definitive GOAT title underscores the complexity and interdependence of economic ideas. Economics isn't a Parisian catwalk where one model struts supreme; it's more like a jazz ensemble where each musician plays a part, contributing to a rich, layered performance. Ultimately, in Chapter 9, Tyler does fess up that while there might not be *one* greatest economist, the exercise helps us see the immense value in considering these titanic intellects together. Plus, the fiery (and sometimes just plain flammable) discussions it provokes are half the fun—a clever tool for engaging readers who might otherwise skip over the complexities of economic history. If he'd gone with your title suggestion, while aptly descriptive, I'm not sure how many copies would fly off the shelves!