Perhaps. But I think that " human curiosity, refined and compounded over the generations" is that thing or set of things which is allowed by the prevailing culture. So coming up with something at odds with cultural biases (say quality of life is inversely related to GDP) will not be funded, will not be taken seriously while something else which ties in with the prevailing orthodoxy (say quality of life is positively related to GDP) will be funded, will be paid considerable attention (maybe a spot on CNBC), etc.
arthur -----Original Message----- From: Ed Weick [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, December 20, 2002 2:05 PM To: Cordell, Arthur: ECOM; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Futurework] Re: Not ideological (was More crap again) > Agree with Brian, and so does "Albert" > > "It is theory that decides what can be observed." (Albert Einstein) But must theory, especially about something like the nature of the universe, be based on ideology as opposed to human curiosity, refined and compounded over the generations? In my previous posting, I used the term "anti-ideological" which is how people like Copernicus and Galileo were perceived by the ideologues or, more properly, theologues of their time. However, neither C or G set out to attack or destroy anything. Curiosity-driven, they wanted to get to the truth. That may be possible in economics, and I used the example Kahneman and Tversky in my previous posting. Yet it is far more difficult in economics because one is dealing with phenomena that are mostly untestable and unprovable, except within the carefully postulated bounds of their assumptions and first principles. Ed > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Brian McAndrews [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Friday, December 20, 2002 10:41 AM > To: Ed Weick; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: [Futurework] Re: Not ideological (was More crap again) > > > > At 9:39 AM -0500 12/20/02, Ed Weick wrote: > >Keith, I didn't mean to imply that you were an ideologue. And I do have to > >back off a bit and agree that not all economics is ideologically based. > > Hi Ed, > Show me the economics that is not ideologically based. Who wrote it? > An infallible human being? Ray's posting of Rupert Ross' thoughts on > Aboriginal language showing that their ethics shaped their concepts > of justice and education should cause us to experience a 'full stop' > re universal truths. > Your initial intuitions to this thread were accurate (IMHO) except > for the 'crap'. I would call it, literally, non-sense. > > Take care, > Brian > > _______________________________________________ > Futurework mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework > _______________________________________________ > Futurework mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework _______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://scribe.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
