I wouldn't say that economics is a /pseudo/science, but it and its conclusions/recommandations are heavily affected by politicized thinking. But even Adam Smith also remarked on this phenomenon, so that's hardly a new development.
Economics is the only "science" I can think of where the leading thinkers refuse to practice anything remotely close to the scientific method.
If we ignore the obvious political aspect, then the field is entirely based on trend prediction. Trend predication is not science. It's observation.
You can't have science without testable, falsifiable hypotheses. I recognize that the nature of macroeconomics makes testing hypotheses comparatively difficult. But it's not impossible, and anyone who says it is, is likely an economist.
Imagine what the world would look like if physicists got together and told the rest of the world that testing hypotheses isn't possible/feasible. That's where we've been at with economics for it's entire existence as a "science".
rybosworld|1 year ago
If we ignore the obvious political aspect, then the field is entirely based on trend prediction. Trend predication is not science. It's observation.
You can't have science without testable, falsifiable hypotheses. I recognize that the nature of macroeconomics makes testing hypotheses comparatively difficult. But it's not impossible, and anyone who says it is, is likely an economist.
Imagine what the world would look like if physicists got together and told the rest of the world that testing hypotheses isn't possible/feasible. That's where we've been at with economics for it's entire existence as a "science".