想真係明"人類"就直接去psycho, anthropology, biology啦
Econ呢類廢坑既人少D廢up勤力D r做randomized controlled group experiment, 唔得就比D腦力用chronosequence approach; 少d堆到成座垃圾山咁既unrealistic assumptions, 最好減到可以explicitly model human variability. 想model human variability既話我諗最好係靠 1 set physical + evolutionary/psychological tradeoffs (類似你做左A就會少啲做B,C,D, based on某currency既限制), 唔駛一定track每個individual, 正如你唔會simulate 每粒原子既運動都可以model到一d自然界現象。點解點都要有少少植根於well-tested既physical/evolutionary principles係因為呢D野inertia夠大(基本上唔可以violate), 會俾個model多d structural realism 同 predictive power (起馬唔會柒過維院呀伯)
講complexity macroeconomics絕對唔會比做Earth/ecosystem modeling個堆難, 所以我覺得係人既問題, 勁人走晒去自然科學, 或者有d sense其實根本係要讀自然科學先慢慢浸到出黎。 自然世界有成千上萬種currency exchange緊, N咁多環境因素, biological diversity, 但靠abstraction同noise filtering, macro-scale predictions都可以做到咁上下, 起馬係根據真實最重要既process慢慢堆砌, 唔岩都可以test。
你亦可以睇下Paul Romer點形容呢個廢坑:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/sep/19/its-time-to-junk-the-flawed-economic-models-that-make-the-world-a-dangerous-place