Dismal science

1Citations
Citations of this article
8Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

"No prediction, no science." By this standard, the past year has not been kind to the pretensions of "economic science," Nobel prizes notwithstanding. The issue is more than semantic. As Neil Postman (1992) pointed out, sciences study natural processes that repeat themselves under constant conditions. The social disciplines study practices of human communities that are embedded in history. There are no constant conditions; it is impossible to step into the same river twice (Heraclitus). "Physics envy" has led mainstream economic theorists to attempt to understand their discipline through methods and models borrowed from the natural sciences. (By unfortunate coincidence, these have reinforced a certain class of ideological preconceptions and associated economic interests.) Today the results of this methodological mismatch speak for themselves.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Evans, R. G. (2009). Dismal science. Healthcare Policy. Longwoods Publishing Corp. https://doi.org/10.12927/hcpol.2009.20815

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free