Don't you mean that 'Parisians' have had little to offer by way of modeling? I agree. It has been a serious weakness in our work so far. On the other hand I would argue that theories should be judged by how well they explain what happens not in the model but in the world. Many splendid models don't.
Dubosc writes: "...Their main interest is their brevity and, at the same time, their reflexivity. An intellectual and moral distance that I think we need in this age of viral videos and blind judgments. Of course, I take sides with Franz Fanon, Hannah Arendt and Edward Saïd."
Marx and Engels
You may be alluding to an old, rather shallow post of mine, cognitionandculture.net/blogs/dan-sp... . But, yes, our book with Hugo Mercier, The Enigma or reason, arguing that reasoning works best in dialogues than in solitary thinking, should be relevant to the issue.
Well, it should be M(ercier) & S(perber), in alphabetical order. Thanks for your interest in our work!