Latin is the Latinized version of the English word ceteris paribus. That means, by itself, it doesn’t mean something else. It means “to give equal weight” to all other elements in a question or a statement.
The Latin word ceteris paribus comes from the Latin ceterum, meaning “to give equal weight to all other elements”, and is also used as a general term for a single element in a question or a statement.
For example, if you want to know the price of a car, you say “Ceteris paribus,” meaning “to give equal weight to all other elements in a question or statement.
The word ceteris is also very common in the English language, as it is the English equivalent for the Latin word terris, which means earth. So, it makes sense that a question or statement that talks about the earth is going to have a weight equivalent to that earth element. This is what economists call the “ceteris paribus” rule.
Basically, the ceteris paribus rule says that if you know that a particular thing is going to happen, then the same thing also happens, so the more things you know, the more likely you are to know that the first thing you need to do is start doing something. So, the more you know about the earth, the more likely you are to understand that you need to start digging.
So, what’s the latest news on the earth? We know that when the earth is on the verge of a huge cataclysmic event, like a nuclear war, then nuclear weapons are going to be used in a major way. But we also know that the earth is not going to be destroyed by a nuclear war. We know that the earth’s surface is still relatively stable.
Just like our planet, the earth has a lot of unknowns. It’s not even clear if an event like a nuclear war is going to be a big cause of global catastrophe. This is the sort of situation that economists like to call “ceteris paribus.” Ceteris means “first of all,” and paribus means “therefore,” and basically that if you know one thing, you need to know something else.
This is why economists are so good at making things up. They make assumptions as to the future and they create scenarios that may seem plausible to us, but still seem unlikely to them. Like when they say that the earth will be destroyed by a nuclear war, we would generally think that they are wrong and probably exaggerating. But when they say that the earth is still relatively stable, we would still think they are right and probably exaggerated.