A Critical Analysis Of Rodrik's Critical Consumptions

Rodrik is constantly using the term “critical assumptions” as a description to why Economics, or in specific, economic models do work in reality. However, it is important to be able to understand what he means by saying “critical”. How is a critical assumption different from any other assumption? Rodrik, however, did not leave us hanging in doubts. He explains that: “We can say an assumption is critical if its modification in an arguably more realistic direction would produce a substantive difference in the conclusions produced by the model”. (Rodrik) In this way, Rodrik does a cross-section of this argument into two sides. The first side is definitely that for an economic model to become critical it needs to be assuming reality, that being
The second is similar in that, however assumptions are to leave the mark here. In the first figure, there is the perfect compliments case, in the second we have a typical quasi-concave (averages preferred) case. The critical assumption lies in how the consumer views the goods. If the consumer views the good as complementary meaning that one can’t stand alone, then the consumer will go with the first curve which violates the concept of convex preferences, something expressed in the arc-shaped indifference
In this sense, it is safe to talk about the concept of Tendencies. The basic point behind this concept is just that economic models are context-specific; which upsets a lot of his critics and especially philosophers. It looks odd to a philosopher because most of the philosophical ideologies are broad in nature in the sense that they can be applied anywhere and in all cases. However, the good thing about “Tendencies” is that it lets you focus your study on certain outcomes by isolating certain factors (casual factors to be more specific). That being said, it is not feasible to generalize a model while it is built upon specific crucial assumptions. This made sense to me an individual in a time being subjected to the various economic systems around the world. It goes without saying, then, that you can’t simply expect that a model under the conditions of hyperinflation to give you the very same outcomes as one in an unbeatable (perfect) economy. Rodrik is continuously revolving on this basic idea that an economic model’s end-results are ultimately dependent on its assumptions; it is then when Tendencies kick in. He believes that a lot of critics and certainly philosophers have been doing this mistake since forever. He ends his argument with a very interesting example on human nature. Professor Rodrik believes that since “economics is a social, and society doesn’t have