[영문독후감] 폴 크루그먼의 The Accidental Theorist
![[영문독후감] 폴 크루그먼의 The Accidental Theorist-1](http://images.happyhaksul.com/thumb/653/652628-0001.gif)
![[영문독후감] 폴 크루그먼의 The Accidental Theorist-2](http://images.happyhaksul.com/thumb/653/652628-0002.gif)
![[영문독후감] 폴 크루그먼의 The Accidental Theorist-3](http://images.happyhaksul.com/thumb/653/652628-0003.gif)
![[영문독후감] 폴 크루그먼의 The Accidental Theorist-4](http://images.happyhaksul.com/thumb/653/652628-0004.gif)
분야
hwpOK, timeout. Before we go any further, I need to ask what you think of an essay that begins this way. Does it sound silly to you? Were you about to turn the virtual page, figuring that this couldn't be about anything important?
One of the points of this column is to illustrate a paradox: You can't do serious economics unless you are willing to be playful. Economic theory is not a collection of dictums laid down by pompous authority figures. Mainly, it is a menagerie of thought experiments--parables, if you like--that are intended to capture the logic of economic processes in a simplified way. In the end, of course, ideas must be tested against the facts. But even to know what facts are relevant, you must play with those ideas in hypothetical settings. And I use the word "play" advisedly: Innovative thinkers, in economics and other disciplines, often have a pronounced whimsical streak.
