Received: by alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk id KAA16390 (8.6.9/5.3[ref firstname.lastname@example.org] for cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk from email@example.com); Wed, 20 Dec 2000 10:06:52 GMT Message-Id: <200012201006.KAA16390@alpheratz.cpm.aca.mmu.ac.uk> Errors-To: firstname.lastname@example.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: email@example.com Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org To: CAMREC list members <email@example.com> From: the Campaign for Real Economics <firstname.lastname@example.org> Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2000 10:04:07 +0000 Subject: Re: CAMREC: Egalitarianism in a world of power-law distributions
> > Do think there are purely scientific economic
> > predictions?
I agree with CHR that the "scientific" bit indicates a strong
relationship with observable phenomena (aka the real world). Merely
adopting the formal clothes of science is not enough. Building vaguely
plausible (in the eye of the beholder) formal structures is merely an
obscure branch of Maths - one that fails the Mathematicians criterion of
importance and generality.
I discuss the role of formalisation in:
There is nothing absolute that would prevent scientific predictions (as
in biology they would be second order structural conclusions rather than
those of the "What specifically will happen next" variety).
Unfortunately present economics is in too much of a rush - hoping for
that magic assumption/technique that will "dissapear" all that
contingent messy detail instead of doing the HUGE amount of description
and field-work that the subject requires before generalisation is
I attempt such a descriptive approach in:
So in conclusion:
IF economic=present economics THEN answer=no
IF economic=social phenomena involving exchange AND prediction is as in
biology AND the question is rephrased to be about the future THEN
Centre for Policy Modelling,
Manchester Metropolitan University, Aytoun Bldg.,
Aytoun St., Manchester, M1 3GH. UK.
Tel: +44 161 247 6479 Fax: +44 161 247 6802
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Dec 20 2000 - 10:06:54 GMT