A Collection of Articles, Opinions, and Research on the Economy.
This video made me think about economics in a completely different way because it is both a science and an art. As a science, Mr. Ip explains that the general rules of economics cannot explain the unpredictability of human beings as a whole. While art is very subjective with different individualistic values, economics can help to find the common values for all human beings.
Just as Greg Ip explains, economics threads the lines between art and science. In regards to a science, being that economics deals with human beings that have unpredictability, it can never predict the predictability that the sciences do. Whereas, economics of art tries to find what is true of everybody at anytime. Mr. Ip opened my mind to the different forms that economics can hold; two being art and science.
I’ve always had this basic understanding of economics as more of a set of principles and rules about the economy, but this video helped me to understand its true function by explaining it in a new way. The scientific aspect of economics gives us a basic understanding of how the markets work. On the other hand, the art of economics gives us an idea of everyone’s basic needs and values. Together, these aspects of economics provide a framework for us to run the economy as efficiently as we possibly can though it cannot account for our human unpredictability.
This video though it is short is very thought provoking. Economics is essentially both an art and a science, but it is neither one more than the other. I never really thought of economics this way and it is eye opening, I used to think like Kelsey that it is a set of principles we follow. From class we have seen that economics is driven by humans its not something that mother nature created, but something that has evolved over time. I am interested to learn more and see how economics functions throughout the world and its origins.
Economics is a subject that I have always had a little bit of difficulty wrapping my head around because I never really understood what category that economics "fits into." After watching this video I have a much clearer understanding as to what economics is in general terms. I completely agree with Greg's view that economics is both an art because it is something that is always changing due to the fact that the market is always changing, but it is also a science because it is something that we can calculate also.
I agree that it is both an art and a science. I think that explaining what causes some aspects is more of a science while finding solutions is more of an art. I look at it this way because there are more than one solution many times to solve a problem and what is the best way is based on personal preferences.
Economy is not entirely art or science. In many way, economy use numbers, math and graph to measure analyze the wealth, production, GDP, unemployment rate, and from that information each nation can set some goal to achieve to get to a better economy. but at the same time it can not be explained such as, why do people saving or invest or inflation, it is like a picture. So as Greg IP said: economy threads line between art and science.
I agree with the statement that economics is a combination of both science and art. In order for economists to theorize mathematical models explaining any type of economic behavior, whether it’s a supply and demand chart or a production possibilities frontier chart, economists must base their theories on the future behavior of consumers. This economical behavior is assumed to be rational by economics, creating an error in their theories when human behavior turns out to be irrational. Therefore, no economist is able to precisely calculate how humans will respond to future decisions in the economy. For that reason, this element of uncertainty makes economics an art. So yes, economics does include various amounts of mathematics, laws, and principles, which is why most people often are fooled into thinking it’s a science, but you cannot run controlled experiments in a lab on future consumer behavior.
I agree with you wholeheartedly on this. For something to be considered a science, it needs to be fully explicable, or at least dedicated to becoming so (Ultimately, this is impossible, due to the fractal nature of information, but that won't stop scientists from trying). Though Economics is more of a art than a science, I would still put forward that it's more of a science than, say, macrobiology, which deals not only with human unpredictability but with all species' chaotic behavior.
I, like many others above, have previously always regarded economics as a science rather than an art. I think this was primarily because of the large amount of principles and rules that markets follow, as well as the large amount of math calculations that can be used to find different trends, profit, ideal output levels, etc. I still believe that economics sways more towards science than art due to the relative objectivity of economics versus the subjectivity of art, but the video stimulated thought.
Right now, I disagree with the statement that economics can be an art. The subject of the video justifies economics as an art by saying that because you can't predict human behavior, economics can not be completely predicted. But when you start talking about human behavior, you're getting into the realms of psychology which is in fact a social science, not an art form. In addition, in other sciences, there is always a realm of unpredictability. That's why experiments attempt to control as much as they can. However, experiments must be ran over and over again. Why is that? To make sure your results are constant because of that unpredictability. Therefore, I need more evidence before I can see economics as a form of art.
Before I watched the video I read a few of the comments; upon reading the comments I agreed economics was a science. Once I watched the video I really appreciated the unique perspective. I can understand viewing economics as an art. Typically science is about proving something right or wrong. As pointed out in the video, when studying economics we can't always say what the correct outcome is versus incorrect. I like the perspective of calling it an art because this is a more unique science and I am a believer that art can be a science.
After watching this video, I would have to still assume that Economics is more of a science than an art. It is constantly trying to prove things that can be true of individual markets or entire markets as a whole. In science, one generally tries to prove that a hypothesis or "guess" of something is right. In that sense I would still assume that Economics is more of a science because of the notion that its always trying to prove some factor to be true. I understand the more art side of it can become relevant because art is about representing the individual and what not, but I personally believe that because the main goal is to describe and represent small and large sections of society, that one must assume the individuality of it must disappear. Generally I do think that it is such a broad and sometimes complex topic that its really hard to just define it to one very rigid category because of all its components.
I ultimately think that economics is far more of an art than it is a science. It deals with human unpredictability, and humans tend to break sociological predictions about their behavior almost as much as they'll follow them. Therefore, economics requires what some would call "finesse" in making a prediction, that is, some sort of "je ne sais quoi" that separates the good from the bad. This is something that the natural sciences rarely require (outside of the lab or field). One generally hears that term related to art, music, or driving a manual transmission. Therefore, I would definitely say that Economics is more of an art than a science.