/lit/ - Literature

Bad bait

>empirical double blinded trial
good bait tho

Marx is full of shit. I say that with a straight face and unironically.

>>12458860
>>12458863
marxism is a literal pseudoscience.

It's not even an economic theory with a mathematical model to test.

It's just made up BS.

>>12458851
>political theory
>pseudoscience
no shit

>>12458851
He basically ripped off Acts 12 or whatever.

>>12458885
but does your economic theory have a empirical double blinded trial?

thought not kiddo

>>12458901
modern economic schools tend to have mathematical models you can test on sociological experiments.

Marxism lacks even a mathematical model.

>>12458906
i want double blinded trials and if not, you to admit economics is a pseudoscience

>>12458920
check some video of any austrian economist, which I consider the most scientific school of economics, they use math models.

>>12458929
Just because someone based their findings on a mathematical model, doesn't necessarily mean they are true. Model selection and analysis are notoriously difficult and content experts often fuck the whole process up and just go with the model that supports their narrative even if it's theoretically incorrect.

>>12458960
A mathematical model can still provide predictions on experiments.

Basic shit like demand and supply laws are corroborated by evidence from the real world.

>>12458960
Unfortunately this, unironically.

>>12458851
Ok, I see a troll when I see one.
Stop baiting this board, go to /fit/, they are a bunch of faggots that need some trolling.

>>12458851
So did Hitler you sandnigger.
Or do you think he used empirical evidence to write Mein Kampf?
Please

>>12458906
Marx does have a mathematical model though

>>12459002
that picture has been disproven many times faggot.

>>12459006
by your friends on /pol/?

>>12458885
Your first mistake was thinking it's a science.

>>12459010
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWmhPR60ftQ

>>12459000
Hitler had even less of a grasp of economics than Marx did. MK contains very little on the subject of economics.

>>12458851
>It's just made up stuff with no evidence.
I know you're trolling but you are also unironically correct.
Anyone could create any narrative and with enough charisma and creativity it will seem to conform to reality, humans aren't so good at parsing this type of thing out and are especially likely to favor things which cast them as the hero of some story of revolution or something.
Yeah.

>>12458881
>>12458885
Economics is pseudoscience and Marx reveals this.

>>12459044
cringe.

>>12459063
Are you stating that he rises above these defects? If so, where does he do this?

>>12458851
It’s 2019 and there are people still thinking that ‘peer review’ and ‘double blinding’ is what defines science. Your methods are going to vary based on what you are studying, and unfortunately when the subject of your research is ‘society’ it’s either impossible or unethical to do hardline experimental research. Epidemiology, for example, I’d consider a science, but for the most part they don’t do anything like double blinded experiments.

If you look in Capital he does in-fact include great swaths of empirical evidence to affirm his case, as well as a fair share of mathematical definitions for the concepts he creates. Volume 2 is an excruciating read because of how many tables of data it includes

And if Marx wasn’t mathematical enough for you, the economist Makoto Itoh did fully work out a mathematical formalism of Marx’s whole system.


Also considering Marx is the most cited thinker of all time it seems strange to accuse him of lacking ‘peer review’. Marx’s peer review has been the thousands of books and tens of thousands of papers which have commented on, critiqued, and extended his ideas.

>>12459239
science works by reproducing studies, that's the entire concept
it's literally 'hey do it yourself and see if it happens again'

>>12459244
Would you say then that things like economic recession and epidemics are beyond the grasp of science because they are by their nature always unique events, which are beyond strictly controlled laboratory replication?

>>12459288
Pretty much yes, id throw in stuff like geology as well. That's not to say there is nothing sensible to be said about these subjects, and tehre are scientific procedures that can be applied.

>>12458851
I've got six words for everyone in this thread:

Thomas Kuhn - Verification
Karl Popper - Falsification

>literally no one has refuted OP yet

LOL at marxfags

>>12459457
>kuhn - verification
you might have outdone yourself there bud

>>12458851
OP is referring to Groucho

>the jewish nigger lassalle...

>>12459000
He did; he observed the filth of Jewry firsthand.

>>12459239
He understood Marx enough to use the dialect to generate this reply.

>>12460126
I like his complaining before that. That fucking landlord and school trying to gouge him for every pound that he has.

>>12459063
Is this some new commie meta? At first you are like
>Marx was best economical theorist and his economics are scientific
and then after getting btfo'd once again you are like
>Economics is pseudoscience and Marx reveals this

You all need to be shot, there is no other cure to this level of combined blatant denialism, irrationality, lying, stupidity and delusion.