Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 17:15:56 UTC No. 16222324
>>16222320
Economics is a science in the same way that meteorology is a science.
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 18:36:25 UTC No. 16222480
>>16222320
Why do you insist on bringing this shit up?
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 19:10:17 UTC No. 16222558
>>16222320
it is a study of something not natural meaning its made by humans so no its not a science
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 19:27:44 UTC No. 16222604
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 20:02:11 UTC No. 16222670
>>16222320
EWNBAS
>>16222558
That's such a shitty argument. Go stand in the corner and think on what you said.
Anonymous at Sat, 8 Jun 2024 20:22:29 UTC No. 16222706
>>16222670
science is when we study stuff thats natural....otherwise its called engineering
Anonymous at Sun, 9 Jun 2024 07:34:55 UTC No. 16223972
>>16222320
They use occasionally some nice mathematical techniques to analyse time series
Anonymous at Sun, 9 Jun 2024 08:15:03 UTC No. 16224006
>>16222320
It's a technology
Anonymous at Sun, 9 Jun 2024 08:57:44 UTC No. 16224043
>>16222320
Microeconomics makes testable predictions that are often not falsified. Macroeconomics doesn't.
Anonymous at Sun, 9 Jun 2024 12:28:14 UTC No. 16224273
>>16222558
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releas
>New research from a Rice University economist suggests certain networks of fungi embrace an important economic theory as they engage in trading nutrients for carbon with their host plants. This finding could aid the understanding of carbon storage in soils, an important tool in mitigating climate change.
>A research paper entitled "Walrasian equilibrium behavior in nature" is available online and will appear in an upcoming edition of Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Ted Loch-Temzelides, a professor of economics and the George and Cynthia Mitchell Chair in Sustainable Development at Rice, examined through an economic lens data from ecological experiments on arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi networks, which connect to plants and facilitate the trading of nutrients for carbon.
economic phenomena seems way more fundamental to the universe than simply our transient human created institutions.
Anonymous at Sun, 9 Jun 2024 12:30:24 UTC No. 16224276
>>16222320
science isn't real because nothing can be known except the facts that you are conscious and exist. that is the extent of science. everything else is unproven beliefs.
Anonymous at Sun, 9 Jun 2024 17:28:29 UTC No. 16224901
>>16222320
The process is scientific the outcomes are rng because we can't have perfect knowledge as everyone competes to win and if we did there'd be no economy to speak of. If incentives were everyone wins we'd have a better foundation, but since we're all divided into tribes trying to fuck each other over there's always a fog of war. Potential is there humans are just headass about it. Why do you keep making this thread? Hasn't this been covered a million times by now?
Anonymous at Sun, 9 Jun 2024 17:34:23 UTC No. 16224910
>>16222706
What? Science is a process yielding + knowledge to our species stats.
Anonymous at Sun, 9 Jun 2024 19:06:30 UTC No. 16225144
>>16222706
>implying human interaction and behaviour is not natural
nothing is unnatural
Anonymous at Sun, 9 Jun 2024 19:19:26 UTC No. 16225181
>>16222320
economists study complex systems with patterns that appear outside of human society, but it would be a stretch to call it a natural science, not every school of thought needs to be natural science to be of value.
Anonymous at Sun, 9 Jun 2024 19:24:47 UTC No. 16225189
>>16222320
Economics is group psychology/sociology in math and finance form. Behavioral economics is definitely a science.
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 06:11:47 UTC No. 16226285
It is art
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 06:17:20 UTC No. 16226298
>>16222558
Based. Human biology isn't a science either because it studies things made by humans
Anonymous at Mon, 10 Jun 2024 06:39:48 UTC No. 16226313
>>16222320
Not testable
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 06:09:02 UTC No. 16228027
These are 5 probably 6 principals.
Interest rate should be eliminated.
Scarcity doesn't exist. Earth has provided constantly and made billionaires. How does wealth exist given the fundamentals of economic development.
Either economic theory is flawed or not being followed.
Evidence poverty and wealth.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 07:51:53 UTC No. 16228098
>>16222320
>Is economics a science?
Does it it use the scientific method to create and test hypotheses?
Does it rely on data, models, and theories to explain and predict human behavior and economic phenomena?
Yes and yes. It's a "fuzzy" science thought, because it often involves subjective judgments, assumptions, value judgments, and economic theories can be influenced by political, social, and cultural factors, so their predictions are not always accurate.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 13:35:00 UTC No. 16228364
>>16226298
you dont think humans come from ................. something else?????
Simulacrum at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 15:27:56 UTC No. 16228474
>>16228098
>>16222320
Good answer. Another thing to consider is that economics involves the study of chaotic systems that involve many changing variables, and it's not as straightforward as physics and chemistry when it comes to testing things because we can't feasibly create experiments consisting of complex economic systems. So it sometimes appears to normal people that economics doesn't make much progress.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 21:00:51 UTC No. 16229093
>>16228364
Good point, take the storkpill
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 21:57:20 UTC No. 16229201
>>16228098
Pretty good take
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 22:15:19 UTC No. 16229238
>>16222324
>>16222320
So is every other "science" that's literally based on statistics. Grow up retards
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 22:18:06 UTC No. 16229246
>>16228364
Humans come from something else but that else are literally other forms of life which had existed long before humans did. So studying humans is basically part of studying an advanced form of something which had already existed and which absolutely needs statistics and proofs to be considered true.
Anonymous at Tue, 11 Jun 2024 22:19:25 UTC No. 16229252
>>16226298
I am a natural scientist and i consider this based.
Hermes at Wed, 12 Jun 2024 01:20:45 UTC No. 16229541
>>16222320
It has math