Economics as Science Debate

Why would economics not be a science?

I'd say that's treating econmics as pure math rather than science.

People most often overlook two things when it comes to economics.First one is that it is based on drawing conclusions from models that attempt to simplify extremely complex interactions of billions of agents.Second one is that although these models are imperfect (otherwise they would be unsolvable and bring no meaningful intuition), they are getting better over time.Stop dismissing economics because 'it doesn't work.' The subject of the science simply doesn't have an

Economics is rather dodgy as a science as well, at least compared to the physical sciences. e.g. (as has been said of philosophers) is there anything more predictable than two economists who will give the opposite recommendations on nearly any question of consequence? That is not science, that is politics. Or at least the science is still in its infancy on questions like that.

What he's describing a marketing model moreso than an economic one. This a theme with behavioural economics. I doubt they'll find one.The "homo economicus" model has become somewhat of a straw man for behavioural economics to disprove. Realistically the model was never claimed to apply in the types of domains where it's being disproved.Consumers of the modern world are bombarded with choices and attempts to influence these choices. That's not a world, IMO, tha

Don't economists empirically test mathematical models of the economy? How is this not science?

Economics isn't a real science either ...

Economics is a pseudo-science.It does not follow the basic principle that knowledge is proved and disproved by experiments. You can find all the sophisticated mathematical methods you want in economics, and none of them would stand a test of reality. Most of so called 'models' come with disclaimers against 'exogenous' shocks, and pretty soon you discover that our whole life is one big exogenous phenomenon.No wonder economists today are desperately in search of identity. You can see them da

Economics is for me the prime example, even more so than psychology. They layer mathamatical models upon models to make it look like "hard" science. But even the most basic assumptions are disputed and you can basically find an economist (even from a reputable institution) for pretty much any position about any topic.No economic theory has ever been found that would be capable to make even modest correct predictions (beyond very basic "rules of thumb" which pretty much hav

I have a Ms in Economics and work as an economist. Most of the criticism and debate I see here is quite interesting, and the reflexions of the author of the article are similar to mines after working several years in the field.You fall in the category of people who think that debate about science should be limited to those who know science theory. The problem I saw in the field is that people talking have to much to loose, hence forbidding a reworking of the fundamental assumption and a tras