What does /sci/ think of Economics? Is it an actually useful science? Or a bunch of inaccurate theories that hold no predictive power? What about its value as a piece of mathematics?
Economics is not a science. To be a science you need to be able to perform controlled experiments, which economics cannot do (artificial studies with undergrad psychology/econ students don't count).
It's the same reason why none of the social sciences are actually science.
>>7970072
Wait, /sci/ has tripfags?
Not strict science, but still incredibly useful. Same as most other humanities/social sciences, save for things like critical theory.
>>7970052
It's too broad to say that all theories have no predictive power; many do. It's really a soft science, and does have uses.
>>7970052
Recommend intresting textbook, please. I have read Krugman's book, but it's boring a bit, over-spoonfed.
>>7970072
Shut the fuck up you positivist trash.
>>7970505
Silent weapons for quiet wars.This one paragraph pretty much sums it up unless you need it spelled right out for you.
>Energy is recognized as the key to all activity on earth. Natural science is the study of the sources and control of natural energy, and social science, theoretically expressed as economics, is the study of the sources and control of social energy. Both are bookkeeping systems: mathematics. Therefore, mathematics is the primary energy science. And the bookkeeper can be king if the public can be kept ignorant of the methodology of the bookkeeping.
>>7970700
what is this tripe
Modern economics is essentially applied statistics. Using econometric approaches to examine economic theory and continue empirical study. I was a STEM robot for many years, and changed to Econ. Unlike other socialol sciences, Econ really wants to be hard science, it just can't really justify running experiments on large swaths of people.
>>7970052
I will believe that economics is a science the day that some Economy PhD says
>In 5 years, 2 months, 3 days, 5 hours, 30 minutes and 5 seconds an economic crysis will start
and then it actually happens.
>>7970809
the same could be said of meteorology, then
>>7970809
wut
Economics touches a lot of subjects, macro economy is just subdivision. Your ignorance is showing. I mean, can an engineer tell you the exact time my door will fall out of its hinges? How about a weatherman telling you if it will rain 3 months from today? These things are complex. Not being able to tell the future isn't a good criteria for the scientific process, although generating models that yield valid predictions is. And that's what economics does. Models of economic phenomena and human behavior that are tested to data. People who say otherwise took only that 1 economics course that was required when they needed to satisfy a social science requirement. Those classes are so watered down that it is ridiculous.
>>7970919
Good point. Engineering is not a science and meteorlogy isn't either.
There is a reason the term pseudo science was coined.
>>7970052
>marx
>economist
>>7970930
It's a shame that all the proponents of economics being regarded as science that i've run into tend to degenerate into "hurr hurr psuedo science" and don't actually bring a philosophy of science discussion to the table or, well, anything. It's just a bunch of monkies flinging shit - so go ahead and keep on keeping on, you're a dime a dozen, but you aren't fooling anyone.
>>7971232
>philosophy of science
kek
>>7970052
>science
No I don't think it can be reasonably called that. It's a social science, not a science in the sense we commonly think of. But I'd say, though I am biased, that it's a pretty useful field and is probably one of, if not the most, respectable and useful social science.
>Price "vector"
>>7971596
Shut up Suzanne. Beth said you're a dyke anyway.
>>7971583
>t it's a pretty useful field
For?
>>7971667
For making money so that PhDs can get their funding
>>7972967
>For making money so that PhDs can get their funding
I love /sci/.
>>7971596
>>Price "vector"
Do tell?
I have never attended an economics lecture but i will proceed to comment on what i think it is anyways
>>7970505
Mankiw is another classic textbook that gets recommended.
PSA: Look for economic textbooks not political economy treatise and critiques like those from Marx or Smith.
>>7970072
muh controlled experiments.
Did you know you can attempt sciences when conditions aren't lab perfect? You can still gain valuable data and knowledge. Its the same reason why you're a fucking retard.
Itsa science ran by donation money.
>>7971667
Public policy, etc.
>inb4 all public policy is shit; 2008 is proof of uselessness of economics
Public policy determined by politicians is shit; public policy determined by economists for practical rather than political purposes isn't perfect but it's usually fairly good. I'm not saying it has physics levels of accuracy, not even remotely close, but it's still useful for monetary policy, etc.
>>7970743
>>7970919
A big problem with Econ is that it's too close to money (i.e. Finance). Which means that people who have a lot to gain from selling certain theories or interpretations of markets can end up tangibly steering the direction of Economics in academia.
Another big related problem is that Economics is too closely related to politics, which again has the same negative impact on the objectivity of the discipline.
>>7975981
Relatedly, see: Singapore, a country run by technocrats.
Why did God create economists? To make meteorologist look good.
>>7970052
Keynesian economics was invented in the 1930tys,
it's comparable to late roman style recklessness.
Wanna know why? Here's Keynesian economics in a fucking nutshell.
>If the economy's in a recession, just print more money and lower interest.
>>7976654
U said the monetary side, it also includes increasing fiscal spending.
That part is basically one big gib gib gib
>>7970072
>social sciences are actually science.
>controlled experiments
You cant do that in medicine either, you can still isolate variables and test hypotheses against empirical data observed the real world.
I bet you think astronomy isn't a science either.
How ignorant.
Also, any heterodox school of econ should be relegated to the humanities dept.
