No subject

/a>&gt;<br>
<br>
-------------------------------------------------------<br>
In his insightful and provocative essay, Richard Norgaard invites us to con=
sider today&#39;s uncritical economic thinking as a modern secular religion=
, the Church of Economism. He draws our attention to the problematic mindse=
t and views of the church&#39;s believers and its =E2=80=9Cpriests,=E2=80=
=9D that is, the professional economists, particularly their insularity and=
 unwarranted self-assurance.<br>
<br>
An article entitled =E2=80=9CThe Superiority of Economists,=E2=80=9D which =
appeared in Winter 2015 issue of the open access Journal of Economic Perspe=
ctives provides substantial support for this portion of Norgaard&#39;s argu=
ment (<a href=3D"http://www.aeaweb.org/articles.php?doi=3D10.1257/jep.29.1.=
89" rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">www.aeaweb.org/articles.php?doi=3D=
10.1257/jep.29.1.89</a>). It provides an extended discussion of insularity =
in economics, showing that it is far greater than in the other social scien=
ces. For example, it presents the results of a survey which asked responden=
ts drawn from a range of social sciences whether they agreed or disagreed t=
hat &quot;In general, interdisciplinary knowledge is better than knowledge =
obtained by a single discipline.&quot; The majority of those in every disci=
pline except economics agreed. In economics, the majority disagreed. Commen=
ting on this stark divergence, the article observed that, compared to other=
 social scientists, economists have a distinctive confidence in the superio=
rity of their discipline, and so are unlikely to feel the need to rely on o=
ther<br>
disciplines or even to acknowledge their existence. A variety of evidence p=
resented or cited in the article supports this observation.<br>
<br>
Why does a sense of superiority arise among economists? It is due in large =
part to their view that they alone have a well-established knowledge base s=
imilar to that possessed by physical scientists or engineers and so are bet=
ter positioned than the others to find the right answers to a wide range of=
 society&#39;s problems. As Norgaard notes, this &quot;physical science del=
usion&quot; is observed by students when they are taught economics, and the=
y are discomforted by it. This delusion is fully accepted and provides the =
basis for discussion within economics. This is made quite clear in a 2006 N=
BER working paper =E2=80=93 =E2=80=9CThe Macroeconomist as Scientist and En=
gineer=E2=80=9D (<a href=3D"http://www.econ.iastate.edu/tesfatsi/Macroecono=
mist_as_Scientist.Mankiw.pdf" rel=3D"noreferrer" target=3D"_blank">www.econ=
.iastate.edu/tesfatsi/Macroeconomist_as_Scientist.Mankiw.pdf</a>) -- by N. =
Gregory Mankiw, a well-known Harvard economist, advisor to President Bush, =
and author of best-selling introductory textbook. Mankiw starts his discuss=
ion by arguing that developing theories with mathematical precision and tes=
ting them using sophisticated<br>
statistical techniques applied to huge data sets makes economists substanti=
ally similar to physicists. The fact that one group studies inanimate objec=
ts and the laws that govern their behavior while the other deals with consc=
ious human beings and the social relationships among them is apparently of =
no importance to the professor. It does not receive a mention, let alone a =
serious discussion, in his paper.<br>
<br>
The sense of superiority based in large part on the physical science delusi=
on and the insularity to which it leads are two of the pillars upon which t=
he Church of Economism rests. They shape the type of church it is. Rather t=
han being ecumenical and respectful of others, it is closed and disdainful.=
 In short, it is a church of just the type one hopes not to see.<br>
<br>
John Stutz<br>
<br>
-----<br>
Original Message<br>
-----<br>
=C2=A0Transition Network [mailto:<a href=3D"mailto:gtnetwork at greattransitio=
n.org">gtnetwork at greattransition.org</a>]<br>
Sent: Friday, October 30, 2015 2:50 PM<br>
=C2=A0Stutz<br>
=C2=A0Church of Economism and Its Discontents (GTN Discussion)<br>
<br>