Epstein’s
worry about economics is common but misplaced because most of us do not know
what a science is. Epstein is worried that an economist makes an analysis or a
forecast based on something that might not always be right. He underscores the
idea that because politicians abuse economics, then it must be the fault of the
economics. It is more true that economics is fine. It is the
politicians and the journalists who are the problem.
I am glad
that Epstein didn’t write about shovels. Shovels are perfectly good tools to move dirt from point A to point B. But if Donald Trump and Nancy Pelosi
were in one room and each held a shovel – he might worry that those dang
shovels are just way too political. Hmmm.
This opening
allows me to pontificate about economics and science. When I was in graduate
school at Chapel Hill I was fortunate to take a course in what was called
economic methodology. It would have been better named economic philosophy or
the philosophy of science. You didn’t learn much micro or macro economics in
that course but rather we learned what it means to seek and find truth. That sounds hoity toity but it is a way to describe what we do as people every day.
In the USA
we drive on the right side of the road. If you drive on the left you soon learn
a lesson about safe driving. You might
say we learn by doing. We find similar truths in many ways every day. Sometimes we find
truth by merely thinking about things. You do not need to throw a dart in the
air above your head to find out it might come down and hit you on the head. Instead, you
could sit in a nice chair and think about the law of gravity. You learn that
what goes up must come down. So, you might not throw a dart or a bowling ball
right above your head. The Theory of Gravity helped you learn that lesson. Of course, repeated trials could teach you the same lesson but that might be painful.
So what is a
science? A science is basically a way to discover what seems to be true. It
usually has two parts to it. The first part is the theory. We use all
sorts of theories to make predictions. The theory of electricity tells you not
to stick your screwdriver into the electrical socket. The theory of macroeconomics tells
you that if governments have too much debt this might raise interest rates
and/or inflation.
The second
part of a science is to test to see if your theory holds in the real world. Have
your worst friend stick a screwdriver into the socket 100 times to see if the
theory holds. Or watch to see how large government debts affect interest rates
and inflation in various countries at various times.
Epstein
worries that economics is not a science. But surely all one has to do is
theorize a bit and then put the theories up to testing in the real world and you have a science. Of course some people make distinctions between hard and soft sciences.
Chemistry might be a hard science because physical laws are pretty old and tested.
Economics is a soft science largely because it is the new kid on the block and
has a ways to go before it gets the predictive accuracy of chemistry. It also deals with human behavior which can be less predictable that electrical currents.
But please
Mr Epstein do not confuse this hard/soft idea with politics and manipulation. All one needs to do is think a
moment about how hard scientists disagree about such things as a hurricane’s
path, the health effects of meatless meat or vaping, the timing of global warming, dangers of
biofoods, the origins of black holes, and so on. No science has it all down pat. There are disagreements within all of them. This means we have not yet learned everything about a phenomenon and need
to keep trying. But it also gives room whenever there is a policy issue
stemming from these disagreements, for politicians and Epstein’s buddies in
journalism to turn science into a heated and colorful debate.
In that
sense, economics is no different from any other science – hard or soft. No
matter what kind of science, when we try to extrapolate what we think we know
into the future, we can never be sure we will be accurate. When we are not
accurate then we should learn from the mistakes and improve the theory. But
Epstein doesn’t care about that – he’d rather blame economics instead of the stupidity of
politicians and the press.
No comments:
Post a Comment