me_irl

6419 readers

752 users here now

All posts need to have the same title: me_irl it is allowed to use an emoji instead of the underscore _

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

herrwoland@lemmy.world

967

me_irl (sh.itjust.works)

submitted 3 days ago by thal3s@sh.itjust.works to c/me_irl@lemmy.world

78 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] blarghly@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago (2 children)

people think economics is a science but it doesn’t consider human nature

That's literally the whole field of behavioral economics.

Also, economists don't care about individual human behavior. That's not what economics is. Economics is the study of broad trends in large populations. And for the most part, modeling these trends as people trying to maximize their own utility function is a useful tool to explain things.

Also also, the point of science is to be measureable and falsifiable so that hypotheses can be tested and disproven, making the predictions of the field more accurate over time. Economists create falsifiable hypotheses. Often they are disproven. Economics gets better at modelling the real world over time. Economics is a science.

[–] svtdragon@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

"All models are wrong; some are useful."

[–] leftytighty@slrpnk.net 2 points 2 days ago

Behavioral economics isn't how we allocate our resources, it's a correction of classical economics to include the human factor. The assumption that everyone is a perfectly rational profit optimizer only reflects reality insofar as we've codified that behavior into our laws and regulations such that shareholders can sue companies for not acting in that assumed way.

The kind of economics people take as science don't describe human populations throughout history.