3 ms·
Still depressed that this statist shill, who can't go two sentences without contradicting human reason, won the "nobel" prize. For an example of a man who actua
by mynameishere 18y ago
Still depressed that this statist shill, who can't go two sentences without contradicting human reason, won the "nobel" prize. For an example of a man who actually improved human welfare, see the first physics recipient,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilhelm_Conrad_R%C3%B6ntgen http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wilhelm_Conrad_R%C3%B6ntgen
- Prrometheus 18y agoHe was awarded the prize for his academic work, not his shilling for the Democratic Party.
- DanielBMarkham 18y agoIt's a prize. A prize in the field of economics, which is hardly physics. Unless there is some empirical process for selection and award, it's just the result of a committee's opinions. If we can agree on that, certainly you can see that the door is open for the members of the committee to be swayed by lots of things, including his political work/views. To act otherwise is to try to turn respected scientists into some sort of mechanistic non-humans. People are influenced by all sorts of things, at the conscious and unconscious levels. I have no idea what part of my statement is controversial. Yet it seems to just drive some people nuts.
- deleted 18y ago[deleted]
- jcl 18y agoAs far as I can tell from the Wikipedia page, there is no difference in the selection processes for the physics and economics prizes... All prizes are just the result of a committee's (and nominators', and screeners') opinions. In this respect, they are all equally valid. For what it's worth, though, the committee members are selected by Norwegian/Swedish institutions, which are perhaps less likely to be swayed by political actions in the U.S.
- brent 18y agoDo you have any examples where Krugman literally and undeniably contradicts himself within two consecutive sentences?