Economist Magazine Explains Why Economics Is Prestigious – But Gets It Wrong
IMHO, the authors get it right;
"What do we learn from this? It is the mathematics of economics – called econometrics – that provides numerous participants and observers with the idea that economics is scientific because it uses complex formulas and equations.
Economists, we learn, don't "play well" with those of other disciplines. They are not especially referential (as far as other fields go) and they are also promotional.
The combination of insularity, (faux-) statistical analysis and aggressive self-promotion explains the heightened profile of economics and economists, according to The Economist.
Not so fast. The Economist leaves out a deeper reason, in our view. From our perspective, the high-profile of economists has to do with the ubiquity and power of central banking."
I find it odd that many of the authors and speakers on Social Engineering and prognostication are Economists. Why do we listen to these people? Why do we listen to anyone that attempts to explain real world phenomena utilizing statistics alone combined with obfuscation of the underlying data and the sources of that data?
Reminds me of the old saw; 'Yestiday I cudn't spell (it), and today I are one.'
"What do we learn from this? It is the mathematics of economics – called econometrics – that provides numerous participants and observers with the idea that economics is scientific because it uses complex formulas and equations.
Economists, we learn, don't "play well" with those of other disciplines. They are not especially referential (as far as other fields go) and they are also promotional.
The combination of insularity, (faux-) statistical analysis and aggressive self-promotion explains the heightened profile of economics and economists, according to The Economist.
Not so fast. The Economist leaves out a deeper reason, in our view. From our perspective, the high-profile of economists has to do with the ubiquity and power of central banking."
I find it odd that many of the authors and speakers on Social Engineering and prognostication are Economists. Why do we listen to these people? Why do we listen to anyone that attempts to explain real world phenomena utilizing statistics alone combined with obfuscation of the underlying data and the sources of that data?
Reminds me of the old saw; 'Yestiday I cudn't spell (it), and today I are one.'
