I’m currently debating on another forum thread in order to defend the use of theory in Economics in the Misesian form, and the status of Economics as a science. I was wondering if you guys could comment on how I’m doing, and chip in with your own comments and contribute to the debate too.
Here’s the address:
http://www.scienceforums.net/forum/showthread.php?p=511485#post511485
Thanks in advance.
By “science”, I assume that they mean “scientific method” rather than “knowledge”.
Scientific method is a component in specific fields. It can be used in some cases. It can not be used in other cases. That is within any individual field. It is not all or nothing.
My issue is that this should not be taken so seriously. The scientific method is a product of logic, not a product of itself. If that is not a problem, it should not be a problem that anything else is.
My own view of Austrian Economics in scientific terms is that it is the latter part of the scientific method, the theorizing. There certainly have been “experiments” (read: observations), it just doesn’t seem so on the face of it because they weren’t performed by the economists themselves. All other schools work the same way. The difference is that they failed at the theorizing.