• 0 Posts
  • 34 Comments
Joined 2 months ago
cake
Cake day: June 4th, 2025

help-circle
  • Karl Popper came up with his criteria for what constitutes science specifically to discredit “soft” sciences, largely because, as an extreme conservative, he didn’t like their conclusions. Like psychology, early work in economics was not experimental in nature, and also like psychology, there are some tricky ethical issues with conducting many experiments. However, economic modeling has reasonably good (and proven) predictive power in many cases, so it’s not just handwavey bullshit. And I’m not an economist trying to defend my turf, I’m a computer guy with a mathematical modeling and physics background, both in my education and in work experience.

    And just to put things in perspective: astrophysics also has many important but non-replicable results. So does paleontology. As does biology. It’s tricky to cause a new Big Bang, build a black hole, or restart evolution. So be dismissive if you like, but replicability is difficult in any social science, and that doesn’t mean that those sciences are a waste of time.