*Thread on Economics and Predictions*

Fascinating ontological case from Tony Lawson:

1) Past economic predictions were unsuccessful
2) Successful prediction is impossible
3) We don't need successful prediction
4) We don't want successful prediction

1) Past economic predictions have been unsuccessful:

Citing John Kay's 'Cracks in the Crystal Ball': https://www.johnkay.com/1995/09/29/cracks-in-the-crystal-ball/

In assessing consultancies forecasting UK growth: "Of the 34 predictions analysed, every one was substantially below the outcome."

2) Successful prediction is impossible:

Mathematical methods require closed systems (w/ event regularities: 'whenever x then y') of isolated atoms.
Contrastingly, social reality is open, structured, relational, processual, and emergent (see 10:15 for definitions).

3) We don't need prediction:

Explanation is more than enough!

Science, broadly speaking, is going from surface phenomena to underlying causes.

A 'scientific' economics would seek to understand social phenomena by examining the social structures that render them possible.

4) We don't want prediction:

"Successful prediction is inconsistent with human emancipation and making the world a better place."

A world in which we can predict is predetermined. We'd rather a social reality in which we can identify and transform the causes of a phenomenon

"We haven't had successful prediction, we can't have it, we don't need it, and we don't want it. If we do without it, we can emancipate economics, and through an emancipated discipline work on making the world a better place too."
@rethinkecon @rethinkecon_in @cacrisalves