Macroeconomic modelers responded to 2008 by swapping textbooks rather than questioning the orthodoxy

Evidence

A third reaction to the crisis is to refrain from indictment of the global orthodoxy, and instead suggest that since the crisis was eminently a “macroeconomic” event, the onus for failure must be narrowly restricted to that subset of the profession tasked with study of the macroeconomy; and furthermore, the correct response is to simply jettison the paradigmatic model found in contemporary macroeconomic textbooks, the so-called Dynamic Stochastic General Equilibrium (DSGE) model. The crisis, for this cadre, does not portend anything remotely like the “death of economics,” but just a garden-variety “model failure”: so replace the model. 
 But this option does even more directly call into question the commonplace notion that economists can learn from their mistakes. — Philip Mirowski, Never Let a Serious Crisis Go to Waste, 779

Categorization

  • XREF: Connects to the reader’s ongoing work on the ‘thought collective’ of post-2008 economics — this ‘replace the model’ maneuver is a classic immunizing strategy within a paradigm. — connects to: Macroeconomists mobilized after 2008 to obscure the crisis’s threat to neoclassical microeconomics — Philip Mirowski, Never Let a Serious Crisis Go to Waste, 799; Economists had no consensus explanation for the 2008 financial crisis — Philip Mirowski, Never Let a Serious Crisis Go to Waste, 448; Conflicting defenses of economic orthodoxy after 2008 cannot all be true. — Philip Mirowski, Never Let a Serious Crisis Go to Waste, 443 (+5 more)

Broader Connections