----- Original Message -----
From: "John D. Giorgis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 6:43 AM
Subject: Re: Economics of Environmentalism RE: Authority of the marketplace?
> At 12:01 AM 7/19/01 -0500 Dan Minette wrote:
> >I would tend to disagree. I know the "social sciences" consider
themselves
> >science, but there is a lot of difference between ecconomics and science.
> >Compare the predictive ability of the best ecconomist with the 100,000th
> >best physicist. :-)
>
> But that's irrelevant.
>
> To quote Alfred, Lort Tennyson "science is trained and ordered common
sense."
>
Well, I strongly differ with that. QM and common sense are at odds, for
example.
> You can't define a science based on the ability of its most trained
members
> to make predictions. That definition is unworkable.
Why? If there are a thousand paradigms and none have preditive ability, I
would argue that its not much of a science. Otherwise, one could count
astrology as a science.
>
> The question is whether or not the specialists rigorously apply the
> scientific method to their work. On this basis, I think that Economics
> most certainly qualifies.
>
Well, at best it qualifies dismally. :-)
