Talk:Cliodynamics

Where is the History section
All major sciences has history. Where is the history of Cliodynamics? Ohanian (talk) 00:40, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

see also include
Ibn Khaldun, population dynamics, ethnogenesis, cliometrics, social simulation, agent-based model, scale-free network, indirect reciprocity, organizational learning, cellular automata, small world network, social networks, Multi-Agent System, voter model, Homo ergaster, prisoner's dilemma, Simulated Society J. D. Redding 01:08, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Computational historical dynamics, Geopolitics, Collective Solidarity, Metaethnic Frontier Theory, Ethnokinetics, Demographic Structural Theory, Secular Cycles in Population Numbers, Geopolitical models, immigration autocatalytic model. J. D. Redding 01:29, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Concepts?:


 * Fiction >> Nonfiction?: Psychohistory (fictional) J. D. Redding 01:33, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

J. D. Redding 01:49, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
 * More related
 * psychohistory, the real (non-fictional) study of the psychological motivation of groups in historical and current events
 * macroeconomics, the real economics sub-field that considers aggregate behavior
 * economic history, the real economics sub-field trying to discover long-run trends in human behaviour (the equations of the Prime Radiant)
 * praxeology, the foundation for the real Austrian School of economics, that attempts to discover synthetic a priori economic laws valid for all human action
 * robopsychology, the fictional study of the personalities of intelligent machines
 * quantitative psychology, the real psychology sub-field that applies statistical mathematics to psychology
 * mathematical sociology, the real sociology sub-field that applies statistical mathematics and other quantitative approaches such as social network analysis to micro- and macro-social phenomena

NPOV
The article is not well referenced and seems to be promoting the Cliodynamics methodology.

Cliodynamics is a new and not well known/established approach to historical research. Yet judging by this article it is already well established and beyond dispute. Some problems I noticed:

1. The claim that Cliodynamics can be traced to the work of Ibn Khaldun. Sounds quite controversial that a 21th century methodology was used by a 14th century scholar. And yet there are no sources to this claim.

2. Section "Mathematical modeling of historical dynamics" has no references and seems to be somewhat promotional when compared with standard introductory sections.

3. Section "Achievements". The fact that someone has created a theory does not make it an achievement. A well known theory states that decline in global number of pirates causes global warming, but most people would probably not consider it an achievement. References are needed for an achievement claim, and not to the books/papers that lay down the theories themselves. Even with references, it seems an "achievements" sections are not common in Wikipedia pages describing a theory or methodological approach.

Yunis (talk) 14:50, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

I'd like to add my vote to the view that this article is promoting the Cliodynamics methodology and the fact that creating an unverified theory is not an "achievement".

152.160.76.249 (talk) 22:05, 5 January 2017 (UTC)Draypresct

Hi, changed that "achivement" word (out of quick gut feeling, please revise and improve) --Sigmundur (talk) 08:50, 3 May 2017 (UTC)