4 ms·

Honestly, the fake Nobel prize for economics really diminishes the credibility of the Nobel prizes and science in general. I like economics, have studied it and

by yyyyip 9y ago

Honestly, the fake Nobel prize for economics really diminishes the credibility of the Nobel prizes and science in general. I like economics, have studied it and follow it, but it does not deserve to be placed alongside the hard sciences where actual irrefutable progress is occuring.

VHRanger 9y ago
Name two economics Nobel winners you disagree their awarding and the reason why they don't merit it
gideon_b 9y ago
Nobel prizes are awarded for Chemistry, Literature, Peace, Physics, Medicine, and Economics. Cultural progress does not hinge on advances in hard science and the Nobel prize is wise to understand that. Failing to recognize the impact of literature, peace and economics on our society is a failure to understand the entire purpose of the award.
- yyyyip 9y ago
  I think economics itself is very important for society. I just don't think economists add much to the field. Peter Nobel, a human rights lawyer and great grandson of Alfred Nobel explained that "Nobel despised people who cared more about profits than society's well-being", saying that "There is nothing to indicate that he would have wanted such a prize", and that the association with the Nobel prizes is "a PR coup by economists to improve their reputation". So often I read some bullshit article with a headline touting the author as being a nobel prize winner, and it is always the economics prize. It debases the achievements of other nobel prize winners, both in hard science and in literature/peace. Even Hayek himself was against the Nobel prize for economics because: "The Nobel Prize confers on an individual an authority which in economics no man ought to possess.... This does not matter in the natural sciences. Here the influence exercised by an individual is chiefly an influence on his fellow experts; and they will soon cut him down to size if he exceeds his competence. But the influence of the economist that mainly matters is an influence over laymen: politicians, journalists, civil servants and the public generally."
  - huac 9y ago
    Alfred Nobel was an arms manufacturer, that's literally putting profits about society's well being.
    - mmirate 9y ago
      Which society, the customer's or their mortal enemy's?
    - aqsalose 9y ago
      And as the story goes, after reading an obituary that argued exactly that ("reports of my death are greatly exaggerated" kind of situation), Nobel drafted a peculiar testament about how his fortune should be used after his death. [1] >The whole of my remaining realizable estate shall be dealt with in the following way: the capital, invested in safe securities by my executors, shall constitute a fund, the interest on which shall be annually distributed in the form of prizes to those who, during the preceding year, shall have conferred the greatest benefit to mankind. The said interest shall be divided into five equal parts, which shall be apportioned as follows: one part to the person who shall have made the most important discovery or invention within the field of physics; one part to the person who shall have made the most important chemical discovery or improvement; one part to the person who shall have made the most important discovery within the domain of physiology or medicine; one part to the person who shall have produced in the field of literature the most outstanding work in an ideal direction; and one part to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses. (You will also notice that the Economics prize is a later addition, having nothing to do with Nobel's will. I've always wondered why the Swedes picked economics as the only field worthy of being added as a prize category despite not being mentioned in the original testament.) [1] https://www.nobelprize.org/alfred_nobel/will/will-full.html https://www.nobelprize.org/alfred_nobel/will/will-full.html
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- kilotaras 9y ago
  Your defense of economics include literature and peaces. Both are original prizes (unlike economics) and weren't mentioned by GP. I recognize impact of literature and peace prizes. I don't recognize such from economics.

by yyyyip 9y ago

VHRanger 9y ago

Name two economics Nobel winners you disagree their awarding and the reason why they don't merit it

gideon_b 9y ago

Nobel prizes are awarded for Chemistry, Literature, Peace, Physics, Medicine, and Economics. Cultural progress does not hinge on advances in hard science and the Nobel prize is wise to understand that. Failing to recognize the impact of literature, peace and economics on our society is a failure to understand the entire purpose of the award.

yyyyip 9y ago
I think economics itself is very important for society. I just don't think economists add much to the field. Peter Nobel, a human rights lawyer and great grandson of Alfred Nobel explained that "Nobel despised people who cared more about profits than society's well-being", saying that "There is nothing to indicate that he would have wanted such a prize", and that the association with the Nobel prizes is "a PR coup by economists to improve their reputation". So often I read some bullshit article with a headline touting the author as being a nobel prize winner, and it is always the economics prize. It debases the achievements of other nobel prize winners, both in hard science and in literature/peace. Even Hayek himself was against the Nobel prize for economics because: "The Nobel Prize confers on an individual an authority which in economics no man ought to possess.... This does not matter in the natural sciences. Here the influence exercised by an individual is chiefly an influence on his fellow experts; and they will soon cut him down to size if he exceeds his competence. But the influence of the economist that mainly matters is an influence over laymen: politicians, journalists, civil servants and the public generally."
- huac 9y ago
  Alfred Nobel was an arms manufacturer, that's literally putting profits about society's well being.
  - mmirate 9y ago
    Which society, the customer's or their mortal enemy's?
  - aqsalose 9y ago
    And as the story goes, after reading an obituary that argued exactly that ("reports of my death are greatly exaggerated" kind of situation), Nobel drafted a peculiar testament about how his fortune should be used after his death. [1] >The whole of my remaining realizable estate shall be dealt with in the following way: the capital, invested in safe securities by my executors, shall constitute a fund, the interest on which shall be annually distributed in the form of prizes to those who, during the preceding year, shall have conferred the greatest benefit to mankind. The said interest shall be divided into five equal parts, which shall be apportioned as follows: one part to the person who shall have made the most important discovery or invention within the field of physics; one part to the person who shall have made the most important chemical discovery or improvement; one part to the person who shall have made the most important discovery within the domain of physiology or medicine; one part to the person who shall have produced in the field of literature the most outstanding work in an ideal direction; and one part to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses. (You will also notice that the Economics prize is a later addition, having nothing to do with Nobel's will. I've always wondered why the Swedes picked economics as the only field worthy of being added as a prize category despite not being mentioned in the original testament.) [1] https://www.nobelprize.org/alfred_nobel/will/will-full.html https://www.nobelprize.org/alfred_nobel/will/will-full.html
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
kilotaras 9y ago
Your defense of economics include literature and peaces. Both are original prizes (unlike economics) and weren't mentioned by GP. I recognize impact of literature and peace prizes. I don't recognize such from economics.