shows, that even with definitions biased towards making economics a science, it is really ridiculous to insist that economics is a science. An example here is a paper by the economics professor at the Victoria University, Australia. A really good example of intellectual deception. I think, it is really embarrassing to agree with such encyclopedic ‘definitions’ and ‘scientific’ papers. When it is so easy to show, that they are simply ridiculous.
I hope, you will find my texts entertaining and surprising, at least. A kind of intellectual exercise so much different than the usual stuff you deal with.
I’ll use this occasion to answer ‘questions’, I’d left unanswered in this thread last time. I admit, I’m curious, if Wittgenstein keeps saying, that: ”it's a description rather than an explanation.”
First of all, incompleteness is not contradiction. You should understand that. One has very little in common with the other.‘A science’ containing contradictions is not a science, but an intellectual mess.
Has mathematics resolved the incompleteness theorems (e.g. Godel)? That is a question rather than a statement.
Secondly, Gödel’s Incompleteness Theorems just show mathematically (logically), what had been known for ages. That we are unable to learn and understand reality using pure thinking alone. It is the Descartes’ “I doubt, therefore I exist” proved formally.
Thirdly, your argument falls into the deceptive way of reasoning I deal with in my text “Academic view on economics”:
“proving something good by asserting everything is bad”
Basically, you say: “Hey, mathematics has its problems, too!”. This way one can ‘prove’ that the US economy is not much better than the one in Yemen. Just find a problem in the US economy. Nothing easier… Who cares, that “the problems” are totally incomparable.
It is hard to argue with plain
I can only say, that if it is not wrong, than it is probably right…It's not even wrong.
No, it's actually wrong
is meaningless and could be put anywhere. However, it sounds wise.Madness to ignorance is like deterministic chaos to randomness.