▲ 456 ▼ economics is not a hard science (lemmy.world) submitted 3 years ago by an_onanist@lemmy.world to c/memes@lemmy.world 140 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] schroedingershat@lemmy.world -1 points 3 years ago (1 child) Oh. You were serious with the "it doesn't matter if it conflicts with reality if I thought a bit because it's 'rational' and directly contradicting reality is the same as an approximation" schtick? I don't know if that sad or even funnier. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] hakase@lemm.ee 2 points 3 years ago (1 child) Ah, I see that I've made the mistake of engaging in this conversation in good faith when that was never your intention. I won't make that mistake with you again. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] schroedingershat@lemmy.world -1 points 3 years ago If air pollution policy was set based on assuming all humans are spherical cows in a vacuum, you might have a coherent point, but when the dominant controlling power in your field is based on the assertion that we should just remove the air to make reality more like the models then your field is a laughing stock. If I posit for a moment that you actually come from a sub-field interested in describing reality rather than altering reality to suit the wealthy, then you should rename what you do or get rid of the ones giving you a bad name. Clean up your shit or call what you do if you want to be taken seriously. Otherwise you get to be lumped in with the feckless ghouls your field holds up as experts. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] hakase@lemm.ee 2 points 3 years ago (1 child) Ah, I see that I've made the mistake of engaging in this conversation in good faith when that was never your intention. I won't make that mistake with you again. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] schroedingershat@lemmy.world -1 points 3 years ago If air pollution policy was set based on assuming all humans are spherical cows in a vacuum, you might have a coherent point, but when the dominant controlling power in your field is based on the assertion that we should just remove the air to make reality more like the models then your field is a laughing stock. If I posit for a moment that you actually come from a sub-field interested in describing reality rather than altering reality to suit the wealthy, then you should rename what you do or get rid of the ones giving you a bad name. Clean up your shit or call what you do if you want to be taken seriously. Otherwise you get to be lumped in with the feckless ghouls your field holds up as experts. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] schroedingershat@lemmy.world -1 points 3 years ago If air pollution policy was set based on assuming all humans are spherical cows in a vacuum, you might have a coherent point, but when the dominant controlling power in your field is based on the assertion that we should just remove the air to make reality more like the models then your field is a laughing stock. If I posit for a moment that you actually come from a sub-field interested in describing reality rather than altering reality to suit the wealthy, then you should rename what you do or get rid of the ones giving you a bad name. Clean up your shit or call what you do if you want to be taken seriously. Otherwise you get to be lumped in with the feckless ghouls your field holds up as experts. permalink fedilink source parent
