6 ms·

For me Nobel prices in Science are one of the things that work better the way they are that most alternatives. Nobel prices in peace are ridiculous. Not talkin

For me Nobel prices in Science are one of the things that work better the way they are that most alternatives. Nobel prices in peace are ridiculous. Not talking about (fake) Nobel prices of Economy that do not exist but have managed to buy themselves some recognition because the money printing of central bankers. For me this article is absurd. If you have a better way of giving to science, create your own price with your own money.

VHRanger 9y ago
> Not talking about (fake) Nobel prices of Economy that do not exist but have managed to buy themselves some recognition because the money printing of central bankers. Name one Nobel prize winner in economics with whom you disagree the awarding and explain your disagreement. Otherwise your comment can be dismissed as another vapid "I disagree with the economics Nobel because the economic science sometimes disagree with my preferred political ideology".
- mkl 9y ago
  There are technically no Nobel Prize winners in economics. I think that's what the comment was talking about. The economics prize is not a Nobel Prize as established by Alfred Nobel, it is the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences [1], established in 1968 by the Swedish National Bank. It is grouped with the others and awarded in the same ceremony, however. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_Memorial_Prize_in_Economic_Sciences https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_Memorial_Prize_in_Econom...
  - VHRanger 9y ago
    Sure, but he was trying to delegitimize the highest honor in a field of study. The economics Nobel is functionally equivalent to the Fields medal or Turing award, regardless of Alfred Nobel's original intent. The point is the poster above was trying to diminish the field of study's legitimacy. Reading between the lines of his post he was doing so because of his political leanings, not because he disagreed with any particular contribution of a economics Nobelist's contribution to human knowledge. We should aspire to be above of such toxic ideologism.
    - KGIII 9y ago
      shrugs I think we should aspire to be above reading between the lines. When we do so, we tend to see that which we want to see, regardless of the author's intent.
    - yyyyip 9y ago
      Why can't he, or I, diminishing the legitimacy of economics? If someone had made up a fake Nobel prize in psychology I would diminishing the legitimacy of that too. The field of economics is far, far less rigorous than any of the hard sciences for which Nobel prizes are awarded. The fake Nobel prize for economics is strongly disputed by much of the Nobel family, Keynes, and it makes economists act more blowhard, self-congratulatory and self-important than they already do. I say this as someone spends a fair chunk of my time reading economics books and blogs.
      - apoorvkumar 9y ago
        > I say this as someone spends a fair chunk of my time reading economics books and blogs. Them credentials!
        yyyyip 9y ago
        :rolleyes: ok Apoorv, if you want credentials, here's Hayek's speech agreeing with me. https://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economic-sciences/laureates/1974/hayek-lecture.html https://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economic-sciences/la...
        VHRanger 9y ago
        OK, and what Nobelist you think carries to much political power because of his award? Paul Krugman? Joe Stiglitz? Matter of fact turned out to be that politicians and laymen only listen to the economics they want to hear, Nobel or not.
        apoorvkumar 9y ago
        Interesting read. Thanks for sharing that. I read Nobel in Economics as 'Nobel in maths (largely statistical optimization) and behavioural psychology'. I personally believe the field adds significant value to society. That said, I do think the award is rather liberally given away. We credit scientists only when their theories test out in practice with sufficient evidence whereas we are more willing to give economists a pass in the name of 'not enough data' or 'valid under certain conditions' . I think we should award only the fundamental time tested truths (statistical or otherwise) which are so entrenched in the way of the world that its discovery has little or no bearing on its exact function. This would award Nash/Selten but not Merton/Scholes. The basic option pricing ended up being just a bunch of really cool but limited equations which tend to be self fulfilling prophecies until when they don't.
- JorgeGT 9y ago
  I think the best argument against a Nobel Prize in Economics was made, precisely, by one of its recipients, Friedrich August von Hayek, during the 1974 ceremony [1]: > I must confess that if I had been consulted whether to establish a Nobel Prize in economics, I should have decidedly advised against it.[...] 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. > There is no reason why a man who has made a distinctive contribution to economic science should be omnicompetent on all problems of society - as the press tends to treat him till in the end he may himself be persuaded to believe. That behavior which he describes... sounds like any Nobel Prize in Economics you know? --- [1] https://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economic-sciences/laureates/1974/hayek-speech.html https://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economic-sciences/la...
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
- kilotaras 9y ago
  I have the advantage of hindsight but this quote comes from Robert E Lucas Jr, 5 years before great recession. > macroeconomics in this original sense has succeeded: Its central problem of depression prevention has been solved, for all practical purposes [0] [0] http://www.sfu.ca/~kkasa/lucas.pdf http://www.sfu.ca/~kkasa/lucas.pdf
  - VHRanger 9y ago
    Well he's still sort of right. The 2008 shock was legitimately more intense than the 1929 one and we came out of it with a "mere recession" instead of the horrors of the 1930s. This is largely due to what the US fed did in response (the US gov. fiscal stimulus probably helped some but not on the same scale). Luckily the fed was headed by Ben Bernanke, one of the most erudite scholars of the Great Depression at the time the world economy was hanging on by a thread.
fatjokes 9y ago
Agreed. Nobel laureates in peace are basically bullshit. Look at Obama---good president, but how many drone strikes did he order, and Aung San Suu Kyi--currently accused of genocide. The Nobel laureates in science indisputably pushed forth the frontiers of human understanding. Frankly, I think the Nobel prizes in the sciences are carrying the name.
- strictfp 9y ago
  This is something we discuss a lot in Sweden. The Nobel peace prize is issued by the Norwegian Nobel Committee, not the Swedish one. And the economy prize was constituted as a response to the bank who started financing the Nobel committee.
- vacri 9y ago
  Perhaps look at it another way - assigning a Nobel peace prize is a way of putting wider attention onto someone, and maybe works as a soft pressure to keep them behaving a little? For half a year or so after you get awarded a peace prize, your profile in the world is a lot higher than normal, perhaps giving you a bit more of a nudge in the right direction. Also, Aung San Suu Kyi won her Nobel Peace Prize in 1991, 26 years ago. How old is that? Well, that was the year that the world-wide-web was born. Kurt Cobain was still alive. George Bush was in office and was just 'George Bush', not 'George Bush Sr' (and the first Bush war against Iraq started in January). The Soviet Union still existed, dissolved only in December of that year. Street Fighter II hit the arcades. The Rodney King beating sparked the LA riots. The war that gave us the term 'ethnic cleansing' started that year in Yugoslavia. Apartheid was still going on in South Africa, with a couple of years left to go. Linus Torvalds announces Linux on comp.os.minix. Calling the Nobel Peace Prize bullshit because a recipient behaves differently-to-expected a generation later is itself bullshit.
  - saiya-jin 9y ago
    This all just illustrates how fickle this price is. Cold, hard facts of science won't likely twist in such a way. And what about Obama? He was kind of a joke of a president, didn't do a thing for world security apart from nice speeches, kept all the evil things going strong and stronger (meaningless wars, guantanamo, spying on whole world including YOU). Maybe he was just a good guy but weak and powerless. Who cares, results are what matters. Why the fuck should he be given such a thing? It casts shame on whole 'nobel' effort. And I can go on and on and on - Mother Theresa is very controversial, so is Arafat, so is Kissinger. Al Gore, seriously?? Most of these people would pass a test as a good person when looking back, and definitely none deserved it. Now look back at scientific nobels, they stand the test of time extremely well. Peace nobel price should be cancelled. I understand if you are norwegian you might not like it, but this price just doesn't make sense and is beyond pathetic.

VHRanger 9y ago

> Not talking about (fake) Nobel prices of Economy that do not exist but have managed to buy themselves some recognition because the money printing of central bankers. Name one Nobel prize winner in economics with whom you disagree the awarding and explain your disagreement. Otherwise your comment can be dismissed as another vapid "I disagree with the economics Nobel because the economic science sometimes disagree with my preferred political ideology".

mkl 9y ago
There are technically no Nobel Prize winners in economics. I think that's what the comment was talking about. The economics prize is not a Nobel Prize as established by Alfred Nobel, it is the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences [1], established in 1968 by the Swedish National Bank. It is grouped with the others and awarded in the same ceremony, however. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_Memorial_Prize_in_Economic_Sciences https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_Memorial_Prize_in_Econom...
- VHRanger 9y ago
  Sure, but he was trying to delegitimize the highest honor in a field of study. The economics Nobel is functionally equivalent to the Fields medal or Turing award, regardless of Alfred Nobel's original intent. The point is the poster above was trying to diminish the field of study's legitimacy. Reading between the lines of his post he was doing so because of his political leanings, not because he disagreed with any particular contribution of a economics Nobelist's contribution to human knowledge. We should aspire to be above of such toxic ideologism.
  - KGIII 9y ago
    shrugs I think we should aspire to be above reading between the lines. When we do so, we tend to see that which we want to see, regardless of the author's intent.
  - yyyyip 9y ago
    Why can't he, or I, diminishing the legitimacy of economics? If someone had made up a fake Nobel prize in psychology I would diminishing the legitimacy of that too. The field of economics is far, far less rigorous than any of the hard sciences for which Nobel prizes are awarded. The fake Nobel prize for economics is strongly disputed by much of the Nobel family, Keynes, and it makes economists act more blowhard, self-congratulatory and self-important than they already do. I say this as someone spends a fair chunk of my time reading economics books and blogs.
    - apoorvkumar 9y ago
      > I say this as someone spends a fair chunk of my time reading economics books and blogs. Them credentials!
      - yyyyip 9y ago
        :rolleyes: ok Apoorv, if you want credentials, here's Hayek's speech agreeing with me. https://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economic-sciences/laureates/1974/hayek-lecture.html https://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economic-sciences/la...
        VHRanger 9y ago
        OK, and what Nobelist you think carries to much political power because of his award? Paul Krugman? Joe Stiglitz? Matter of fact turned out to be that politicians and laymen only listen to the economics they want to hear, Nobel or not.
        apoorvkumar 9y ago
        Interesting read. Thanks for sharing that. I read Nobel in Economics as 'Nobel in maths (largely statistical optimization) and behavioural psychology'. I personally believe the field adds significant value to society. That said, I do think the award is rather liberally given away. We credit scientists only when their theories test out in practice with sufficient evidence whereas we are more willing to give economists a pass in the name of 'not enough data' or 'valid under certain conditions' . I think we should award only the fundamental time tested truths (statistical or otherwise) which are so entrenched in the way of the world that its discovery has little or no bearing on its exact function. This would award Nash/Selten but not Merton/Scholes. The basic option pricing ended up being just a bunch of really cool but limited equations which tend to be self fulfilling prophecies until when they don't.
JorgeGT 9y ago
I think the best argument against a Nobel Prize in Economics was made, precisely, by one of its recipients, Friedrich August von Hayek, during the 1974 ceremony [1]: > I must confess that if I had been consulted whether to establish a Nobel Prize in economics, I should have decidedly advised against it.[...] 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. > There is no reason why a man who has made a distinctive contribution to economic science should be omnicompetent on all problems of society - as the press tends to treat him till in the end he may himself be persuaded to believe. That behavior which he describes... sounds like any Nobel Prize in Economics you know? --- [1] https://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economic-sciences/laureates/1974/hayek-speech.html https://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economic-sciences/la...
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
kilotaras 9y ago
I have the advantage of hindsight but this quote comes from Robert E Lucas Jr, 5 years before great recession. > macroeconomics in this original sense has succeeded: Its central problem of depression prevention has been solved, for all practical purposes [0] [0] http://www.sfu.ca/~kkasa/lucas.pdf http://www.sfu.ca/~kkasa/lucas.pdf
- VHRanger 9y ago
  Well he's still sort of right. The 2008 shock was legitimately more intense than the 1929 one and we came out of it with a "mere recession" instead of the horrors of the 1930s. This is largely due to what the US fed did in response (the US gov. fiscal stimulus probably helped some but not on the same scale). Luckily the fed was headed by Ben Bernanke, one of the most erudite scholars of the Great Depression at the time the world economy was hanging on by a thread.

fatjokes 9y ago

Agreed. Nobel laureates in peace are basically bullshit. Look at Obama---good president, but how many drone strikes did he order, and Aung San Suu Kyi--currently accused of genocide. The Nobel laureates in science indisputably pushed forth the frontiers of human understanding. Frankly, I think the Nobel prizes in the sciences are carrying the name.

strictfp 9y ago
This is something we discuss a lot in Sweden. The Nobel peace prize is issued by the Norwegian Nobel Committee, not the Swedish one. And the economy prize was constituted as a response to the bank who started financing the Nobel committee.
vacri 9y ago
Perhaps look at it another way - assigning a Nobel peace prize is a way of putting wider attention onto someone, and maybe works as a soft pressure to keep them behaving a little? For half a year or so after you get awarded a peace prize, your profile in the world is a lot higher than normal, perhaps giving you a bit more of a nudge in the right direction. Also, Aung San Suu Kyi won her Nobel Peace Prize in 1991, 26 years ago. How old is that? Well, that was the year that the world-wide-web was born. Kurt Cobain was still alive. George Bush was in office and was just 'George Bush', not 'George Bush Sr' (and the first Bush war against Iraq started in January). The Soviet Union still existed, dissolved only in December of that year. Street Fighter II hit the arcades. The Rodney King beating sparked the LA riots. The war that gave us the term 'ethnic cleansing' started that year in Yugoslavia. Apartheid was still going on in South Africa, with a couple of years left to go. Linus Torvalds announces Linux on comp.os.minix. Calling the Nobel Peace Prize bullshit because a recipient behaves differently-to-expected a generation later is itself bullshit.
- saiya-jin 9y ago
  This all just illustrates how fickle this price is. Cold, hard facts of science won't likely twist in such a way. And what about Obama? He was kind of a joke of a president, didn't do a thing for world security apart from nice speeches, kept all the evil things going strong and stronger (meaningless wars, guantanamo, spying on whole world including YOU). Maybe he was just a good guy but weak and powerless. Who cares, results are what matters. Why the fuck should he be given such a thing? It casts shame on whole 'nobel' effort. And I can go on and on and on - Mother Theresa is very controversial, so is Arafat, so is Kissinger. Al Gore, seriously?? Most of these people would pass a test as a good person when looking back, and definitely none deserved it. Now look back at scientific nobels, they stand the test of time extremely well. Peace nobel price should be cancelled. I understand if you are norwegian you might not like it, but this price just doesn't make sense and is beyond pathetic.