The heterodox ideas found here and elsewhere have had no impact on economics as a whole, just as the body of science studies research has had no effect on the natural sciences. Mirowski would attribute this to the "vested interest" of neoclassical economics. An alternative explanation is that research programs such as those found here-which fail to provide either new empirical insights or criticisms of existing practice that are intellectually compelling, let alone constructive ways to proceed-do not have enough substance to warrant a claim on intellectual resources. In my judgment, in this instance the marketplace of ideas is working efficiently.-Steven N. Durlauf, Economics, University of Wisconsin-Madison ____________________________________ Travis W Fast
> On 14 Jun, 2007, at 10:02 AM, Wojtek Sokolowski wrote:
> > I think that the very term "scientism" as opposed
> > to old fashioned "fraud" and "charlatanry" smacks of ideological
> > obscurantism, populism, and luddism by stipulating that there is
> > something
> > suspicious in science itself rather than in its improper or
> > fraudulent uses.
>
>
> Ha! Just as sexism implies that there is something suspicious in sex
> itself... well perhaps there is! This (the sort of non-argument
> resident polemic -- Woj -- whom I greatly enjoy reading, especially
> when he takes off on the "working class" -- offers above) is all in
> fact obscurantism of the worst kind, though highly entertaining as
> noted, but quite in line with the tactics of today's high priests
> when they are challenged: a lot of hand-waving, name-calling, appeal
> to authority and a very quick abandoning of the "scientific
> method" (as defined by them).
>
> Anyway, at the cost of sounding stuffy and dismissive (perhaps even
> without cause), this is all covered in philosophy of science 101 and
> I shall continue to refrain from rehashing it with the usual
> suspects. I will say though that other list-members who have the
> suspicion that [especially non-scientists] use this ill-defined thing
> called "science" to bully others into accepting their views
> ("Truths") should not feel intimidated at all by such. Logic is on
> your side (as the rhetoric of the opposite side demonstrates)! ;-)
>
> Chuck: thanks for the response,
>
> --ravi
>
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk