From Lars Syll There is also a practical problem, if economics as a discipline is to survive. There is a huge amount of junk in the peer-reviewed economics literature -– the reviewing process is no protection when the reviewers themselves are prejudiced. A comparison that comes to mind is the collapse of “scientific” eugenics. There were vast amounts of that written, and now it is only read as an object example of the capture of a social science by prejudice and authoritarianism. For economists, meantime, there is a huge task ahead: the garbage must be taken out; removed from the field’s teaching, textbooks, and policy advice. It will be a generation at least before this is set right, if indeed it can be set right at all. Advice Unask
Topics:
Lars Pålsson Syll considers the following as important: Uncategorized
This could be interesting, too:
John Quiggin writes Towards deliberative Parliaments: Greens success at recent elections points the way
Editor writes Long Read – Is Bitcoin more energy intensive than mainstream finance?
Peter Radford writes Weekend read – The trouble with words
Dean Baker writes In a free market, drugs are cheap, government-granted patent monopolies make them expensive
from Lars Syll
There is also a practical problem, if economics as a discipline is to survive. There is a huge amount of junk in the peer-reviewed economics literature -– the reviewing process is no protection when the reviewers themselves are prejudiced. A comparison that comes to mind is the collapse of “scientific” eugenics. There were vast amounts of that written, and now it is only read as an object example of the capture of a social science by prejudice and authoritarianism. For economists, meantime, there is a huge task ahead: the garbage must be taken out; removed from the field’s teaching, textbooks, and policy advice. It will be a generation at least before this is set right, if indeed it can be set right at all.