But the authors of the three books under review deny categorically that neoclassical economics is a science. Economists have taken certain scientific concepts—such as equilibrium, stability, efficiency, feedback loops—and certain mathematical and statistical techniques and notions—such as calculus, probability, normal distribution, randomness, independence—and applied them to society in ways both inappropriate and simple-minded. Each of these writers concludes that, while economics has scientific pretensions, it is primarily an ideology...
...Orrell defines ten ``economyths'' and devotes a chapter to each one: (1) the economy can be described by economic laws; (2) the economy is made up of independent individuals; (3) the economy is stable; (4) economic risk can be easily managed using statistics; (5) the economy is rational and efficient; (6) the economy is gender-neutral; (7) the economy is fair; (8) economic growth can continue forever; (9) economic growth will make us happy; and (10) economic growth is always good. Michael Yates ------------- This was a fun review. Economists could feel a lot more like they were doing something, if they studied the empirical facts. Doug does a good job at deconstructing economics, by doing just that. It actually looks like fun, because he uses data (facts) usually supplied by government sources. Another simple idea that would help is to understand for people the basic want is that society serve the needs of the people and its economic system serve the needs of society. The way it is now, is completely upside down. We are told by virutally every government and international institution we must save the economy to save society. As far as I am concerned the economic system has caused most of the social ills we suffer. Harvey uses concepts from thermodynamics which are important to know for studying geography. But he does it in an intuitative way. He also uses a reciprocating system of relationships (dialectics) instead of cause and effect. This helps a lot as both a model of understanding and a better predictor of what might happen went there are changes in one part of the system that have multiple reactions in other parts of the system. There are a lot of `sciences' beside physics that provide models for developing a better kind of empirical study of the actually existing economic system. I don't know the history of public education in the US. It is essentially a socialized system, without even mentioning that dirty word. My guess is it became such a system because there was no other practical way to educate the vast bulk of children. I read somewhere, that companies were forced to provide some limited reading and writing and arithmetic skills to child labor somewhere in the factory complexes. Of course it was a joke. The teachers were just other factory workers with some limited literacy skills themselves. Maybe if more of this US history was presented, it would have some effect on the current assault. CG
_______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
