February 2, 2018

Econblogosphere: The flawed Top 101

Comment on Barkley Rosser on ‘EconoSpeak Again A Top 101 Economics-Finance Blog

Blog-Reference

Economics is a failed science. Fact is that the four main approaches ― Walrasianism, Keynesianism, Marxianism, Austrianism ― are mutually contradictory, axiomatically false, materially/formally inconsistent and all got the pivotal economic concept profit wrong. After 200+ years, economics is still at the level of a proto-science or what Feynman called a cargo cult science.

It is a historical fact that theoretical economics (= science) had been hijacked from the very beginning by political economists (= agenda pushers). Political economics, though, is not guided by the principles of Science but by the principles of Circus Maximus. Accordingly, in soapbox economics anything goes; in theoretical economics, the scientific standards of material and formal consistency are observed.

It is the defining characteristic of the topsy-turvy world of cargo cult science that fake scientists produce fake science “They’re doing everything right. The form is perfect. ... But it doesn’t work. ... So I call these things cargo cult science because they follow all the apparent precepts and forms of scientific investigation, but they’re missing something essential.” (Feynman)

In economics, the violation of scientific standards takes many forms. A scientist, for example, accepts refutation. However, as already Morgenstern realized, this is not what can be observed in economics: “In economics we should strive to proceed, wherever we can, exactly according to the standards of the other, more advanced, sciences, where it is not possible, once an issue has been decided, to continue to write about it as if nothing had happened.”

The fake scientist in the econblogosphere is, quite naturally, not enthusiastic about critique/refutation but sees to it that it vanishes as fast as possible from his blog or makes sure that it is blocked from the outset.

The whole extent of manipulation/corruption is, of course, unknown. What is known, though, is that at least four blogs of the Top 101 routinely suppress critique/refutation. As a result, the best economics stuff is NOT to be found on the blogs but in their spam folders. This is how the topsy-turvy world of cargo cult science works.

Cryptoeconomics ― the best of Mark Thoma’s spam folder
Cryptoeconomics ― the best of Nick Rowe’s spam folder
Cryptoeconomics ― the best of Bill Mitchell’s spam folder
Cryptoeconomics ― the best of Lars Syll’s spam folder

Egmont Kakarot-Handtke


Related 'Needed: the Top 10 of substandard economics blogs' and 'Needed: The Worst of the Worst of economics blogs' and 'Are MMTers stupid or corrupt or both?' and 'Feynman Integrity, fake science, and the econblogosphere' and 'Enough! Economists, retire now!' and '10 steps to leave cargo cult economics behind for good'.

***
#PointOfProof