• grte@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 hours ago

    What they said is actually totally reasonable. People (particularly economists) treat economics as though it’s a hard science akin to physics or chemistry, but it’s a soft science. They gave David Card a nobel in economics for figuring out a way to actually test hypotheses some of the time. In 2021.

    • TheReanuKeeves@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 hours ago

      Econ is math explaining how anything affects markets, it uses actual logic to explain changes. Give me some examples of how theology uses math to explain anything

      • grte@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 hours ago

        Give me examples of economists coming up with hypotheses and then building experiments to test them.

          • grte@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 hour ago

            The global financial crisis was a huge surprise to most economists and is basically the #1 example of the field not having any predictive power, something you generally want from a hard science.

              • grte@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                45 minutes ago

                Sure. I guess this falls under ‘natural experiments’ which is what David Card got his nobel for, figuring out how to test hypotheses some of the time. Now try and do peer review on that result.

                • 🇨🇦GreenBeard🇨🇦@lemmy.ca
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  43 minutes ago

                  “While I find the methodology highly suspect and the ethics abhorrent, my biggest objection to the analysis is that the author seems to be drawing a positive conclusion from a clearly null result.”