Discussion Tuesday

Given I’m currently heavily heavily busy I’ll have to pull another comment from this Top 10 at 10

Economists don’t have universal truths, which is why I can’t understand how it is called a science.  Without those universal truths all you can expect is opinions.


  1. Does science have universal truths?
  2. Is it true that without universal truths all we have are opinions?
  3. If 2 is true, then is it a lost cause – or perhaps is there a mechanism that makes some “opinions” relatively more valid/persuasive/closer to “truth”

Note:  I hope one of the other bloggers will cover off the National and Labour policy announcements – as I haven’t had any time to look at them at all – *wink wink*.  If it doesn’t happen during the week, I’ll see if I can manage something in the future.

1 reply
  1. Daniel J. Taylor
    Daniel J. Taylor says:

    1.) No, seeing as scientific method readily accepts the possibility of fallibilism, the seeking of truths that are “universal” is a moot pursuit. Indeed, science does not pretend to seek universal truths. Science seeks to predict the nature of phenomena through empirical and testible explanations – which is somewhat different.
    2.) It’s all just “opinions”, however some opinions have substantially more empirical backing than others.
    3.) As per 2.

Comments are closed.