by Dani Rodrik is an economist so his view is a bit biased in that direction, but he makes good points overall. For a more complete picture, critiques from other disciplines would be needed, along with critques from within the economics profession. Oh wait, heterodox economists have written on this profusely. And Rodrik only refers to non-economist critiques from other professions obliquely.The issue is mooted by low likelihood that economists will modify their bias anytime soon. This has already been said before and ignored.This is especially significant since economics is considered a policy science and it extremely influential in policy setting. Other relevant disciplines either tend to be ignored or are blended with the foundational assumptions of conventional economists, such as
Topics:
Mike Norman considers the following as important:
This could be interesting, too:
Robert Vienneau writes Austrian Capital Theory And Triple-Switching In The Corn-Tractor Model
Mike Norman writes The Accursed Tariffs — NeilW
Mike Norman writes IRS has agreed to share migrants’ tax information with ICE
Mike Norman writes Trump’s “Liberation Day”: Another PR Gag, or Global Reorientation Turning Point? — Simplicius
The issue is mooted by low likelihood that economists will modify their bias anytime soon. This has already been said before and ignored.
"A" for effort though. At least it is a call for modesty, if not actually for humility.
Project Syndicate
How Economists and Non-Economists Can Get Along
Dani Rodrik, Professor of International Political Economy at Harvard University’s John F. Kennedy School of Government
See also at PS
Yuen Yuen Ang Says More…
Interview with Yuen Yuen Ang, Associate Professor of Political Science at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor