Isn’t Economics just a model of a very complex system? (Human interactions and decision making)
Aren’t all models incomplete by their nature?
Aren’t some models less accurate than others? (Map-territory)
Why is it that it seems debates about Economics devolve into dumpster fires? I don’t observe such bashing of heads in other “harder” sciences such as physics or mathematics. It seems quite straightforward (in some sense) for anyone to verify claims made in those fields and to prove the usefulness or correctness of the underlying models.
When it comes to Economics, however, we plebeians see a pattern emerge:
“You don’t know Economics”
“Your arguments are flawed”
(Which of course, may be true, but they themselves are neither proof nor argument)
“[appeals to hypocrisy, tu quoque, appeal to authority, ad hominem…]”
“[list of arguments but lack of reproducibility]”
This observation leads me to two conclusions:
- That Economics as a science is underdeveloped when considering the complex phenomena it attempts to model; and
- The field acts less like a science and more like a dogma.
Am I totally off base here?