The role of assumptions in economics: An application to Christianity
An interesting point was brought up in the tutorials about how a number of critics of Harberger stated that the assumptions about his model may not hold in the real world. For example, firms may be under price leadership behaviour, instead of behaving competitively. Furthermore, firms need not maximize profits, instead, they may maximize total sales. The striking conclusion from most of these alternative models is that they do not generate any testable predictions, i.e. we are unable to apply any form of comparative statics to these models. Often their answer for these would be, "We do not know" or "It depends".
This is a very famous criticism of neoclassical economics; criticizing it for using 'unrealistic models'. A related criticism is on economists using too much mathematics in their analysis, in which the critics feel that it is unrealistic to depict people's thinking using mathematics. Well, I analyzed this criticism in my honours thesis and I concluded that, with some reservations, the above criticism is invalid. There are too many economics literature that argued about this point and a good start if you wish to find out is Milton Friedman's The Methodology of Positive Economics published in 1953. You can find this article in his book Essays in Positive Economics, available by checking the LINC, or by clicking here. If there is nothing else you can remember about economics after you graduate from NUS, at the very least, know how to answer your non-economist friends when they poke fun on economics, either by using the above criticism or by criticizing the excessive use of mathematics in economics. Paul Krugman has much to say about critics of economic formalism like these, with two very brilliant and enlightening articles here and here. Sigh, how I wish I had the opportunity to read these articles before I learn all those economic theory courses! I would have been so much more motivated to learn, for example, those 'ridiculous overlapping generation models' or the 'irritating Hessian matrix' J. Never mind, I hope to appreciate all these if I make it to US graduate school.
Another interesting point is that there are certain assumptions that economists swear by. This means that they do not have to be formally stated in economic models, it is taken for granted. For example, utility maximization and profit maximization are two of such assumptions. Thus, these assumptions have reached the status of being axioms in economics. To deny these axioms is to tell us that you are abandoning neoclassical economics.
I indirectly applied this to understanding religions when I realized that there are also certain axioms in Protestant Christianity. To be a Protestant Christian implies that you have to believe in them, otherwise they will probably label you as a cultist. A clear example of such an axiom is the Holy Trinity. The Catholic Church, on the other hand, might have some more axioms that Protestants need not agree on, which led to Martin Luther breaking away a long time ago. The role of the Virgin Mary would be clearest issue of contentment. If you are a Protestant, you must believe in the Holy Trinity. If you are an orthodox Catholic, besides believing in the Holy Trinity, I think you must also take Mary very seriously. A Protestant who also believes in praying through the Virgin Mary would have to face some serious objections from the others using 1 Timothy 2:5 that says "For there is one God and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus." Similarly, a Protestant who believes in reincarnation, like the Buddhists, might face objections from others using Hebrews 9: 27, "Just as man is destined to die once, and after that to face judgment". At least, I would use those verses J.
My knowledge in this is not perfect though, since I have talked to Catholics who do not share the same belief in Mary. The point is that different religions have different axioms that all their followers must believe in.
A reader of this article has send me her views as a Catholic. Click here to read it or scroll below. I am so glad someone bothered to respond and I encourage all of you to do so.
Back to to concept of the Holy Trinity, all mainstream Christians must accept the Father Son and Holy Spirit concept, about three separate entities of God and yet make up one God, unequivocally. When I realized this, I remember smiling to myself because the Bible did not really state clearly about the concept of the Holy Trinity, for example, check out Acts 5:3-4, 2 Corinthians 13:14 and Deuteronomy 6:4, yet all of us accepts it. I used this observation to counter argue Christians who claimed that baptism by sprinkling, and some acts of the charismatic side are unbiblical because the Bible did not mention them. I pointed out to them that there are many things not explicitly stated in the Bible, the Holy Trinity for example, yet we take them as unquestionable in Christianity. The point I was driving then was that it is not sufficient to state a Christian act being unbiblical merely because the Bible did not state the act explicitly, which is quite analogous to the criticism that economic models are of no use merely because they use unrealistic assumptions.
Q: Why does the Church feel justified in calling Mary "Mediatrix"? Surely the verse in 1 Timothy 2:5 makes it impossible for that title to be warranted. After all, if Jesus Christ is the one Mediator between God and man -- a fact which Vatican II's Dogmatic Constitution on the Church itself admits to be true when it says "the Blessed Virgin is invoked in the Church under the titles of Advocate, Helper, Benefactress, and Mediatrix. This, however, is so understood that it neither takes away anything from nor adds anything to the dignity and efficacy of Christ the one Mediator" (Lumen Gentium 62) -- then there is neither any place, nor any necessity for another mediator.
A: 1 Timothy 2:5 does indeed proclaim the fact that Jesus is the one Mediator between God and man, and this is certainly true, since he is the only God-man and thus the only possible Mediator in that sense. However, this does not exclude the idea of other people praying for us, whether in heaven or on earth. This is crystal clear if you read the four verses immediately preceding 1 Timothy 2:5. Together with verses 5 and 6 (so you can see the context) they state:
1 First of all, then, I urge that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings be made for all men,
2 for kings and all who are in high positions, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life, godly and respectful in every way.
3 This is good, and it is acceptable in the sight of God our Savior,
4 who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.
5 For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus,
6 who gave himself as a ransom for all, the testimony to which was borne at the proper time. (RSV)
You will note that verse 5 begins with the explanatory copula "For," which connects it to the preverious statement (verse 4) that God desires all men to be saved and come to a knowledge of the truth. The truth which he desires men to come to a knowledge of and which will save them is stated in verses 5 and 6 -- that there is one God and that Jesus Christ is the one way to approach God (not Buddha or Mohammed or Apollo or Jupiter or Ba'al), as he is the God-man who gave himself up as a ransom for our sins.
This saving knowledge (saving if it is embraced and acted upon, that is) is the thing which Paul urges us to promote in verses 1 and 2. He urges us to pray for everyone and lead godly lives so that people will be attracted to this saving truth.
The flow of his thought is thus that we should offer intercessory prayer for the salvation of all men (verse 1) and lead holy lives (verse 2) because this pleases God (verse 3) in part because it promotes his agenda of having people to come to a knowledge of the truth and be saved (verse 4), that knowledge consisting in the fact that there is one God (verse 5a) and that Jesus is the manner through which he must be approached (verse 5b) because it was Christ Jesus who died for us to atone for our sins (verse 6).
Thus Paul's departure point for this whole discussion, the thing that sets the context for his discussion of Christ as the one Mediator (the one God-man) is the fact that we should pray for everyone. Thus the intercession of others is not in any way excluded by Christ's Mediatorship. In fact, our prayers become efficacious because of Christ's Mediatorship since we pray "in his name" (whether we use those words or not).
With this understanding of the difference between Christ as the exclusive God-man Redeemer/Mediator on the one hand and of the ability of other Christians to intercede for us on the other, the imagined difficulty is solved. Christ is the only Mediator in the sense that he is the only God-man, the only Person capable of redeeming us from our sins, however other people can mediate in the sense of offering intercessions. In fact, Scripture applies the very same Greek term for "mediator" that is used in 1 Timothy 2:5 to Moses in Galatians 3:19-20, where it speaks of the Mosaic covenant having been "ordained by angels [the angels God set over Israel during the Exodus] through a mediator [Moses]."
It is in the sense of being an intercessor that Mary is called a Mediatrix. In this she is the same as all other Christians who pray for others (in heaven or on earth), but due to her special role in God's plan, having been chosen to be the mother of the infinite Son of God, her prayers have special efficacy. As James tells us, "the prayers of a righteous man availeth much" (Jas. 5:16), and Mary is as righteous as they come (of course, she is not a man, but James is using the term "man" in its gender-inclusive sense; the prayers of a righteous woman availeth much, too).
Having other Christians praying for you does not in any way diminish or impugn Christ's mediation (or else Paul would never have ordered Christians to engage in intercessory prayer), and Mary, as the chief Christian, is no exception to this. In fact, it is because of Christ's mediation that her prayers and our prayers have any effect at all. Christ and his death are the source of all graces, and if God graciously answers Mary's prayers or ours, it is because of Christ. Mary prays, just like we do, "in the name of Christ."