Re: Appears to be
The baby is tossed out with the bathwater, and in it's place, people like jake123 substitute methods of knowledge acquisition that are prone to the same (and often worse) problems caused by "approximation". I don't like it when people use a legitimate criticism of one thing to imply a legitimate defense of an alternative.
"B" has this flaw--therefore we must use "A" doesn't make sense, especially when "A" has the same problems in greater magnitude than "B".
To Wrap it up:
1. Economics is not science--it is trying to become a science.
2. This means that historicism, Austrianism, Keynesianism and Monetarism are all non-sciences.
3. If you defend one over the other you do so for emotional reasons--unless one is actually capable of predicting novel facts.
