Is economics a science, or just a dinner-party? ....

Generali

Conrad wrote: »

And this Sir is why economics and the business of prediction will never be a science.

blah

Fools follow expert predictions.

I agree 100%.

However, economics is the best thing we have to explain and predict a certain set of human behaviours. If we all put our heads together perhaps we can come up with something better.

mr_fishbulb

Generali wrote: »

However, economics is the best thing we have to explain and predict a certain set of human behaviours. If we all put our heads together perhaps we can come up with something better.

Yeah a pure science would be able to test hypothesis and come up with an unarguable answer via proof. Economics can't do that, it can only theorise explanations.

But as you say it's all we have, and even if it's not 100% I enjoy the theories that come out of it.

kabayiri

Generali wrote: »

...
The same principle can be applied to economics. There are too many unknown unknowns out there to be able to predict the future with any certainty. You'd know if anyone had economics licked because they'd make a billion squillion gazzillion quid in a few months of trading.
...

I'm sure there was a famous economist (or perhaps scientisit) who dealt with this 'unknown unknowns' issue.

To quote the honourable Mr Rumsfeld :-

"Reports that say that something hasn't happened are always interesting to me, because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns -- the ones we don't know we don't know."

TruckerT

kabayiri wrote: »

"Reports that say that something hasn't happened are always interesting to me, because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns -- the ones we don't know we don't know."

I have generally found it easy to prove that something has happened, but difficult to prove that something has not happened

My understanding of the word 'science' is that it claims to be able to predict what will happen

All sciences begin with a process of identifying and classifying a sequence or variety of natural events or processes after they have happened - IMHO most social sciences, including economics, have not yet moved out of that phase

TruckerT

shortchanged_2

A good economist is like a good weather forecaster.

Basically there aren't any.

Most economists are about as accurate as a weather forecaster predicting next weeks weather.

B_Blank

In science you prove things. In economics you speculat based on the info you have available. Its not a science.

antrobus

TruckerT wrote: »

.... let's face it. economists failed to prevent the recent melt-down(s), and appear to have no way of either predicting or influencing current and future events...

TruckerT

Well, let's face it, doctors appear unable to prevent their patients becoming ill, and there are precious few meteorologists around who appear to be able to control the weather.

A more pertinent question would be; why to people expect economists to be able to predict the future? Why do people not understand that economic events are the result of the combined efforts of billions of individuals?

pinkteapot

michaels wrote: »

I wouldn't even rate it for dinner parties

Michael, MA Econ, Cantab

Oddly I have found the same... We should go to the same dinner parties.

pinkteapot, MA Econ, Oxon

the_flying_pig

shortchanged wrote: »

A good economist is like a good weather forecaster.

Basically there aren't any.

Most economists are about as accurate as a weather forecaster predicting next weeks weather.

a comparison with meteorology wouldn't be a bad one, IMO.

but, whilst weather forecasting accounts for a reasonably big chunk of all meteorology, almost all economics is not about macroeconomic forecasting. any suggestion otherwise would be a fairly serious misconception.

pinkteapot

To quote The West Wing, "Economists were put on this Earth to make astrologers look good."