3 ms·

Economists make mistakes. Like any other science. Their uncertainty is larger than something like physics, but not large enough to be considered pseudoscience.

Economists make mistakes. Like any other science. Their uncertainty is larger than something like physics, but not large enough to be considered pseudoscience. In newspapers they’ll shoot their mouths, but in their journals, they’re quite scientific. Your criticisms kinda remind me of data science work, where you say “the effect of doing this will probably be between -3 and +7, assuming X, Y, and Z, so it’s worth looking into.” Which PMs (like politicians) take as 2 (+/- 5) and promise the rest of the org a gain of 2. Then we implement it and it comes out as -1 and you need a post mortem about how data scientists (economists) got it so wrong.

carapace 6y ago
To me it seems like economics is just above numerology. Operationally it's a state pseudo-religion. The priests consult their tea leaves or goat guts or whatever and advise the kings, and no one ever talks about how full of shit they are, because that's their whole purpose. A scientific economics would be grounded in ecology and anthropology. It would talk about calories and niches. It would make reliable predictions.
mola 6y ago
Well, what actually matters in reality is how they shoot their mouth off in newspapers. In this respect, they are mostly quacks. Peddling psuedo science on the basis of pretty weak while rigorous science. Economists should stop shooting their mouth in neespapers as if they know something, that's being misleading. And hiding ideology behind _math_.
chillacy 6y ago
Much of macro economics is unlike physics not only in uncertainty, but more critically in lack of experimentation or falsifiability. https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2013/12/13/economics-science-wang/ https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2013/12/13/economics-scie... http://skepticalphilosopher.blogspot.com/2009/02/falsifiability-and-macroeconomics.html http://skepticalphilosopher.blogspot.com/2009/02/falsifiabil... (I'm aware there are branches of economics which are based on experimentation but they seem to not be the norm)

carapace 6y ago

To me it seems like economics is just above numerology. Operationally it's a state pseudo-religion. The priests consult their tea leaves or goat guts or whatever and advise the kings, and no one ever talks about how full of shit they are, because that's their whole purpose. A scientific economics would be grounded in ecology and anthropology. It would talk about calories and niches. It would make reliable predictions.

mola 6y ago

Well, what actually matters in reality is how they shoot their mouth off in newspapers. In this respect, they are mostly quacks. Peddling psuedo science on the basis of pretty weak while rigorous science. Economists should stop shooting their mouth in neespapers as if they know something, that's being misleading. And hiding ideology behind _math_.

chillacy 6y ago

Much of macro economics is unlike physics not only in uncertainty, but more critically in lack of experimentation or falsifiability. https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2013/12/13/economics-science-wang/ https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2013/12/13/economics-scie... http://skepticalphilosopher.blogspot.com/2009/02/falsifiability-and-macroeconomics.html http://skepticalphilosopher.blogspot.com/2009/02/falsifiabil... (I'm aware there are branches of economics which are based on experimentation but they seem to not be the norm)