/sci/ - Science & Math

>>9424305
>Is economics a science?
>Is finance a science?
No because neither make use of the scientific method.

>>9424305
Yeah you can do whatever you want

>>9424308
How does economics not make use of the scientific method? Or is it that you've never studied any economics? Go to bed, brainlet.

>>9424348
>How does economics not make use of the scientific method?
I'm not sure what kind of answer you expect, it's the same way the scientific method isn't applied to criminal law or burger flipping or astrology, it just isn't. What made you mistakenly think it was used in economics?

Anyone who thinks there's a single, unified "scientific method" doesn't really understand science. Conducting experiments and drawing conclusions from the results definitely qualifies as "science".

>>9424370
>Conducting experiments and drawing conclusions from the results definitely qualifies as "science".
define "science"

>>9424360
>What made you mistakenly think it was used in economics?
Oh boy!

In all seriousness, economics is certainly a soft science on account of the limitations inherent in studying social systems, but like any science it's about proposing hypothesis and gathering data to support them. It's nothing like criminal law or burger flipping. What I'm suggesting is that you don't actually know what economists do.

>>9424380
Please read 2500 years of Western philosophy before posting.

>>9424384
$20 says he starts talking about falsification

>>9424396
My dude, Popper is not the sole representative of philosophy of science. Do you even Theaetetus?

>>9424406
by "he" I meant >>9424360

>>9424426
My apologies then.

>>9424384
>Please read 2500 years of Western philosophy before posting.
That doesn't look like much of a definition for "science", can you try again?

>>9424426
>by "he" I meant >>9424360
I'm not a "he".

They try to be. Ideally they are. There are some stupid fucking things published in the biological and hard sciences too. Not as much, but no bully.

>>9424443
"She" then. I took an educated guess.

>>9424443
No wonder you're this stupid.

at best they are applied math not science. at worst they are applied homosexuality

>>9424463
>at best they are applied math not science
What's the mathematical definition of "economy"?

>>9424467
What's the mathematical definition of physics? Your question is bad.

>>9424469
>What's the mathematical definition of physics? Your question is bad.
But all you did was commit a fallacy, can you try again without that doing that?

>>9424467
What qualifies as "mathematical"?

>>9424478
No. Fallacy fallacy.

Holy shit this thread sucks

>>9424484
>No. Fallacy fallacy.
Then your post has been disregarded.

>>9424305
Economics is a -> Social Science

>>9424383
im not the one you replied to, but it would appear you fell for a "bait post."

Economics is just quantified psychology. The economists who run actual experiments with direct observations and not stupid Facebook quiz-tier "imagine you have THIS and then THIS happens" are doing actual science. They've built up a literature sophisticated enough to predict and control entire markets if done right. That's why they get paid more than medical doctors under particular circumstances.

>>9424493
>Then your post has been disregarded.
Then your post has been disregarded.

>>9424591
>"imagine you have THIS and then THIS happens"
WOW that sounds almost like... MATHEMATICS
it's almost like... some economists are applied mathematicians... and others are social scientists... depending on their APPROACH or something... woah

>>9424597

That's not what I mean. Most economic researchers claim they have developed predictive models of human behavior but, when you really look at their work, all they do is ask people hypothetical questions and graph it after transforming the data a billion layers deep, aggregating hundreds of data points, and selectively removing any """outliers""" that make their r^2 values too low. They're snake oil salesmen who treat hung-over college undergrads clicking blindly on a screen as representative of all human behavior.

Half of these so-called "robust" models don't stand up to even the simplest of real-world applications. Absolute dog shit.

>>9424610
you're correct and i misinterpreted your post

>>9424626
>You'll never have an adorable shark as a pet

;_;

>>9424640
>large sea pets
At least we don't have to worry about dolphins asking for hand-jobs. I prefer living on land thanks.

>>9424348
Scientific method is outdated.

>>9424305
Old joke.
Graduate comes to visit his old Economics professor and notices blank exam booklets lying on the desk. He looks at one.
"Why, Professor! These are the same questions you asked when I was an undergraduate! Don't you realize the students pass the questions on to the next class?"
"Oh, of course. But each year, we change the answers!"

>>9425596
>Scientific method
No such thing.

>>9425828
>Scientific method
No such thing.

>>9424305
Economics is a soft science, finance is a soft applied (double soft) science.

>>9425846
>Scientific method
No such thing.

>>9425665
This made me laugh. Literally applies to everything

>>9424370
Any discipline that can produce Say's Law is not scientific.

finance student here. most of what we learn is bullshit, the only good stuff is econometrics and data analysis. regret not studying statistics instead

>>9424305

NO

Economics/Finance does not uses scientific method in any way, mainly because there is not a way to make reliable repeateable experiments in the economy.

Economics its more like math, defines objects, axioms and deduce logically how those objects (economic agents) would function in a specific enviroment (perfect competition,etc)

>>9426553
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experimental_economics

>Is economics a science?
This is what many thinkers debate constantly.

When it is descriptive, it describes things as they are. This aspect of it is a science.

When it is prescriptive, it is largely theoretical, using empirical evidence to reinforce claims. This aspect of it is an art.
>Is finance a science?
No

>>9426568
Thats bullshit, using game theory, bringing a bunch of people for a particular game and then generalizing for the entire economy is not a experiment. Neither its the econometrics "lets overfit this bunch of data and throw some linear regressions until it werks" approach.

Its a similar problem with pyhscology, a researcher makes an experiment and concludes X, then another researcher does another experiment and concludes the exact opposite. Economics is the only field where economists could agree in absolutely nothing, they are very far for any kind of unified theory.

finance is just applied microeconomics with money