In Defense of the “Dismal Science”

 

• Economics are called the “Dismal Science”.

 why?

• It’s called that way because of how much Pessimistic & wrong Economists are with their analyses & predictions..

 

• Another -& more optimistic- way to look at it is that Economists are Alarmists, and that Alarmism is important to their work to warn us about the potential dangers we might be facing in future.

 

Thus such alarmism ends up giving to the Economist’s ideas more exposure, thus more mobilization, thus more odds of prevention of what the Economists were warning about, hence why people think they are always wrong while in fact they were the reason behind the bad thing not happening to begin with..

 

• It’s the opposite of a self-fulfilling prophecy..

it’s more like a time traveler going to the past to fix a future issue; or a Retrocausal agent who’s the victim of a Reverse Causality; i.e. linking correlation to causation: which you can only do through The Interventionist Theory of Causation, which ironically could be used to know if the Economists do indeed prevent future disasters (via avoiding their advices, and even drive them to extinction via prohibit the field after their prediction; which may not be evident as people’s fear will grow with each event happening similar to what they talked about )..

 

• It’s not that an Economist is Pessimist & wrong, it’s rather that he is Realist & Anticipationist .. kind of how Preventive Medicine works.

 

• In laymen’s terms: an Economist can’t go to the future to know issues that’ll exist as a result of present actions then comeback to fix them; thus he does the next best thing he can do, which is to explore all possible future bad actions & actors, then yap people’s ears off about them to try prevent them..

 

• If you are a white hat hacker that’ve found a possible exploit in a system, would you leave it there until something bad happens or about to happen? Or report it right away to prevent any bad act(or)ion usage?