by Summary:
Jason Smith makes a key observation here that many miss. Science is inherently a skeptical enterprise where conclusions are tentative on both forthcoming empirical findings and new explanations that challenge existing ones, which they may replace if they provide a better explanation in the view of the scientific community. "Firmly held beliefs" has another label — dogma. The dogmatic approach is opposite of the scientific one. Of course, this doesn't mean that fringe views are to be considered on a par with consensus ones. at the same time, the consensus view represents heavy investment that may attempt to neutralize challenges by categorizing them as fringe. However, scientific method provides criteria for addressing such controversies. On the other hand, see the works of Paul
Topics:
Mike Norman considers the following as important: conventional economics, economics and ideology, Robert Solow
This could be interesting, too:
Jason Smith makes a key observation here that many miss. Science is inherently a skeptical enterprise where conclusions are tentative on both forthcoming empirical findings and new explanations that challenge existing ones, which they may replace if they provide a better explanation in the view of the scientific community. "Firmly held beliefs" has another label — dogma. The dogmatic approach is opposite of the scientific one. Of course, this doesn't mean that fringe views are to be considered on a par with consensus ones. at the same time, the consensus view represents heavy investment that may attempt to neutralize challenges by categorizing them as fringe. However, scientific method provides criteria for addressing such controversies. On the other hand, see the works of Paul
Topics:
Mike Norman considers the following as important: conventional economics, economics and ideology, Robert Solow
This could be interesting, too:
Mike Norman writes David Ricardo’s explanation of the case for free trade rests on some basic economic principles, but also has a big public policy blind spot — Miles Corak
Mike Norman writes The old guard trying to stay relevant and failing — Bill Mitchell
Mike Norman writes Is There Really A Trade-Off Between Inflation And Unemployment? — Brian Romanchuk
Mike Norman writes Lars P. Syll — Arrow-Debreu and the Bourbaki illusion of rigour
"Firmly held beliefs" has another label — dogma. The dogmatic approach is opposite of the scientific one.
Of course, this doesn't mean that fringe views are to be considered on a par with consensus ones. at the same time, the consensus view represents heavy investment that may attempt to neutralize challenges by categorizing them as fringe. However, scientific method provides criteria for addressing such controversies. On the other hand, see the works of Paul Feyerabend, especially Against Method.
Paul Feyerabend (1924–1994) argued that no description of scientific method could possibly be broad enough to include all the approaches and methods used by scientists, and that there are no useful and exception-free methodological rules governing the progress of science. He argued that "the only principle that does not inhibit progress is: anything goes".[48]
Feyerabend said that science started as a liberating movement, but that over time it had become increasingly dogmatic and rigid and had some oppressive features. and thus had become increasingly an ideology. Because of this, he said it was impossible to come up with an unambiguous way to distinguish science from religion, magic, or mythology. He saw the exclusive dominance of science as a means of directing society as authoritarian and ungrounded.[48] Promulgation of this epistemological anarchism earned Feyerabend the title of "the worst enemy of science" from his detractors.[49] — Wikipedia-Philosophy of Science-Contermporary approaches
Incidentally, the quotation, "When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?" has been attributed to Keynes so often it is now a commonplace. There is no solid documentation of this, however.