I guess the first question that goes towards "answering" the bigger one on top is: what is a science?
According to my beliefs, a science is anything that can be measured both quantitatively and qualitatively and then turned into some sort of conclusion that should be able to repeat itself each time given the same conditions.
In regards to economics:
Can be measured quantitatively: Yes. Money. CREAM.
Can be measured qualitatively: I guess if you consider the livelihoods of people in regards to the economy, then yes? I'm hesitant to say there is anything specifically qualitative that doesn't result directly from the quantitative ($$$).
Conclusion: I think the idea of economics is that people are always trying to come up with some sort of definite conclusion... but they never can... which is why all those Wall Street people LOVE WU TANG.
Repeatable: I think it would be if we could have the same conditions, but that part seems extremely difficult to achieve.
So, in regards to my (questionable) parameters of what makes a science, I do think that economics is a science; however, I think it is an incomplete science that people still have not made substantial discoveries in for it to become a commonplace science (like physics for example, where we know that if you drop something on earth, it will always fall towards the earth).
I agree with your definition on science. Classification of animals is based on qualitative data and experiments are mostly based on quantitative data. However I would have to disagree with your definition about the qualitative part of economics. Yes, in order to gather specific data through the eyes, the best way to measure economics is the lifestyle that people live. Wealthy or poor? Mansion or towns home? Then shouldn't economics be considered science because it fulfills the definition of science. Sure, sometimes one might not get the same results after repeating the experiment of economics, but just like in science, there is always a chance of error in economics.
ReplyDeleteAnd about the part where if there is anything specifically qualitative that doesn't result directly from quantitative, wouldn't observing the conditions of water in the ocean for qualitative data be in relation to quantitative data? Like there are some parts of science that the qualitative data would be directly because of the quantitative data.