{"title":"实证金融的认知极限:因果还原论与自我参照","authors":"Daniel Polakow, Tim Gebbie, Emlyn Flint","doi":"arxiv-2311.16570","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The clarion call for causal reduction in the study of capital markets is\nintensifying. However, in self-referencing and open systems such as capital\nmarkets, the idea of unidirectional causation (if applicable) may be limiting\nat best, and unstable or fallacious at worst. In this research, we critically\nassess the use of scientific deduction and causal inference within the study of\nempirical finance and econometrics. We then demonstrate the idea of competing\ncausal chains using a toy model adapted from ecological predator/prey\nrelationships. From this, we develop the alternative view that the study of\nempirical finance, and the risks contained therein, may be better appreciated\nonce we admit that our current arsenal of quantitative finance tools may be\nlimited to ex post causal inference under popular assumptions. Where these\nassumptions are challenged, for example in a recognizable reflexive context,\nthe prescription of unidirectional causation proves deeply problematic.","PeriodicalId":501372,"journal":{"name":"arXiv - QuantFin - General Finance","volume":"12 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Epistemic Limits of Empirical Finance: Causal Reductionism and Self-Reference\",\"authors\":\"Daniel Polakow, Tim Gebbie, Emlyn Flint\",\"doi\":\"arxiv-2311.16570\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The clarion call for causal reduction in the study of capital markets is\\nintensifying. However, in self-referencing and open systems such as capital\\nmarkets, the idea of unidirectional causation (if applicable) may be limiting\\nat best, and unstable or fallacious at worst. In this research, we critically\\nassess the use of scientific deduction and causal inference within the study of\\nempirical finance and econometrics. We then demonstrate the idea of competing\\ncausal chains using a toy model adapted from ecological predator/prey\\nrelationships. From this, we develop the alternative view that the study of\\nempirical finance, and the risks contained therein, may be better appreciated\\nonce we admit that our current arsenal of quantitative finance tools may be\\nlimited to ex post causal inference under popular assumptions. Where these\\nassumptions are challenged, for example in a recognizable reflexive context,\\nthe prescription of unidirectional causation proves deeply problematic.\",\"PeriodicalId\":501372,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"arXiv - QuantFin - General Finance\",\"volume\":\"12 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"arXiv - QuantFin - General Finance\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/arxiv-2311.16570\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"arXiv - QuantFin - General Finance","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/arxiv-2311.16570","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Epistemic Limits of Empirical Finance: Causal Reductionism and Self-Reference
The clarion call for causal reduction in the study of capital markets is
intensifying. However, in self-referencing and open systems such as capital
markets, the idea of unidirectional causation (if applicable) may be limiting
at best, and unstable or fallacious at worst. In this research, we critically
assess the use of scientific deduction and causal inference within the study of
empirical finance and econometrics. We then demonstrate the idea of competing
causal chains using a toy model adapted from ecological predator/prey
relationships. From this, we develop the alternative view that the study of
empirical finance, and the risks contained therein, may be better appreciated
once we admit that our current arsenal of quantitative finance tools may be
limited to ex post causal inference under popular assumptions. Where these
assumptions are challenged, for example in a recognizable reflexive context,
the prescription of unidirectional causation proves deeply problematic.