This is a supremely antiscientific comment of you to make — don’t you know that eCoNomIcS iS a sCiEnce!!!
And of course, as a science, it builds models that generate testable predictions, altering the model if the empirical data doesn’t match what’s predicted, right? …It does do that, right? (Spoiler alert: not particularly).
I do think that economics is a science, but most economists I have known were unwilling to acknowledge that it’s a social science. “But qUanTiTatIvE mEtHoDs!!!”, they say, as if that makes any difference to whether they’re a social science or not.
It irks me to no end because it’d be far more rigorous of a field if they just got their heads out of their own arses and properly understood the situatedness of their field. The more they insist their analyses are objective, the less I believe them
This is a supremely antiscientific comment of you to make — don’t you know that eCoNomIcS iS a sCiEnce!!!
And of course, as a science, it builds models that generate testable predictions, altering the model if the empirical data doesn’t match what’s predicted, right? …It does do that, right? (Spoiler alert: not particularly).
I do think that economics is a science, but most economists I have known were unwilling to acknowledge that it’s a social science. “But qUanTiTatIvE mEtHoDs!!!”, they say, as if that makes any difference to whether they’re a social science or not.
It irks me to no end because it’d be far more rigorous of a field if they just got their heads out of their own arses and properly understood the situatedness of their field. The more they insist their analyses are objective, the less I believe them