Is Economics a science?

>>8310040
No one who makes more than $30k is a real scientist.

>>8310040
To some people

Science is linear. Economics is cyclic.

File: b17ac5682abf0a05be3cf680167a2ec3c20920ded3272791562dd7f7e1f9d09e.jpg (136KB, 712x840px) Image search: [Google]

136KB, 712x840px

No

>>8310090
really makes you think

>>8310040
Technically, but the tools used are usually shit at predicting, economists tend to be wrong a lot.

>>8310045
what did he mean by this?

>>8310040
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_dismal_science

>>8310040
Yes, it does use the scientific method, but produced little knowledge compared to other fields.

>>8310040

Yes.

>>8310099
>austrian school
That's like saying chemistry isn't legit because alchemy wasn't

>>8310040
No. Economics is like /sci/ - a bunch of science fans who don't have any actual fucking clue what they're talking about or what makes science scientific.

>>8310822
not even "real" scientists use the scientific method in their day to day work. The scientific method is an ideal not something people actually practice but something people try to approximate to

and no, economics it's not an empirical science, it's a traditional science in the sense of systematic knowledge like literary sciences.

that doesn't mean you can't do empirical science within economics, but that's not the basis at all. You can also do empirical science within literary sciences as in following trends by counting words in book and stuff like that, but literary science is obviously neither an empirical science in the sense physics is.