In a few seconds of partly facetious, partly very serious discussion. He’s not far from the truth either![embedded content]And, yes, as Searle says, we can indeed have an epistemologically objective science of economics, even though important things in economic life are subjective in a deeper sense (e.g., expectations, subjective utility) than just being “observer-relative.”The epistemologically objective science we need is Post Keynesian economics. Everything else is charlatanry, pseudo-science, or, at most, just a pale imitation of Post Keynesian economics.
Topics:
Lord Keynes considers the following as important: Economics, John Searle
This could be interesting, too:
Lars Pålsson Syll writes Schuldenbremse bye bye
Lars Pålsson Syll writes What’s wrong with economics — a primer
Lars Pålsson Syll writes Krigskeynesianismens återkomst
Lars Pålsson Syll writes Finding Eigenvalues and Eigenvectors (student stuff)
And, yes, as Searle says, we can indeed have an epistemologically objective science of economics, even though important things in economic life are subjective in a deeper sense (e.g., expectations, subjective utility) than just being “observer-relative.”
The epistemologically objective science we need is Post Keynesian economics. Everything else is charlatanry, pseudo-science, or, at most, just a pale imitation of Post Keynesian economics.