Economics as the Solution to Cognitive Dissonance

By Daniel Miessler on September 30th, 2007: Tagged as Economics | Logic | Philosophy
  • I would have to agree with that, particularly if you are talking about Austrian economics. Some of the brands of economics use "science" to endorse or justify certain government policies and regulations. The Austrians start from this axiom that humans act by using means to obtain ends. Their ends are individualistic and self-centered. The Austrians do not claim to know unrevealed individual preferences nor do they deduce the need for government interventionism in the market. Acting man is able to create working arrangements with other acting men that benefit all involved.

  • Here's a thought about economics as a science.


    When was the last time that you heard an economist say " we were wrong on that point ".


    :: crickets ::


    There's always some "unforeseen boundary condition" or "except well this one time" that comes up so very, very often in economist's explanations of why their theory's predictive power was simply wrong.


    Unlike science where the wrong thing gets disowned from time to time, economics seems to behave more like a religion ( and thus, perhaps, the immunity to cognitive dissonance ), when what's predicted fails there's always an explanation.


    Any study where your theory lacks predictive power that is routinely incorrect should not dance under the name "science". Nota bene, few schools include economics in the college of natural science - for this reason?

blog comments powered by Disqus

Twitter Microblog

twitter_icon      facebook_icon

Sample Original Content


Information Security

Tutorials and Primers

Culture & Society

Technology & Science

Politics

Philosophy & Religion

Miscellaneous

Tools & Projects


Blog Archives