<p>It's just the same as in the physical sciences:</p>

<p>an economic theory, like any theory or model in physics or chemistry or biology, is wrong (H/T George Box), but it can be useful.</p>

<p>"True knowledge" is not a really a useful concept; not in physical sciences, not in social sciences. The important question is whether a model gives us useful insights, and whether it can constructively inform decisions.</p>

<p>An economic theory gains acceptance when it turns out to be useful.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-08-17T07:46:51.110Z
I would question the final statement though. An economic theory may well gain acceptance also because it benefits some group. E.g. communist theories for workers, the opposite for wealthy people. That is then not an objective or neutral theory.
mavavilj
CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-08-16T16:53:19.477Z
2018-08-16T16:53:19.477Z
410 gone
<p>When - just as in physics of any other science - testable predictions fit observed data. It's "true knowledge", and neither is any theory in any science, but rather, empirically observed behavior that matches what the framework/theory predicts. That's a good benchmark for good theory.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-08-17T07:08:59.063Z
I would agree that ideally yes, however the reason for positing the question was that I'm unsure as to how often economic truths actually are very well-tested. Yet they may be used to draw political conclusions.
mavavilj
CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-08-16T18:06:43.997Z
2018-08-16T18:06:43.997Z
Pedro Cavalcante
<p>When does an economic theory become true?</p>

<p>When does it satisfy requirements for true knowledge, e.g. similar to those in empirical sciences?</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-08-16T14:03:54.637Z
Hi: It's an interesting question but I don't think it's possible. All one can do is test the theory econometrically-statistically and make a conclusion based on the results of the test. economics and the empirical sciences are quite different in that respect.
mark leeds
CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-08-16T16:24:27.990Z
What exactly are the requirements for *true knowledge*? Philosophers have been [debating for centuries without an agreement on what constitutes knowledge per se](https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/knowledge-analysis/), let alone the true vs. false versions of it, or if there could ever be false knowledge as such.
Herr K.
CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-08-16T16:30:28.663Z
@HerrK. Well at least there are some models that work better than some others. So I would say, just use the one that is most meaningful at the moment or in the given context.
mavavilj
CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-08-16T18:33:16.320Z
im kind of with Herr K. here. there are issues of truth even in the "Hard" sciences.
EconJohn
CC BY-SA 4.0
2018-08-16T18:44:14.790Z
@EconJohn It doesn't stop them from being productive. So even if it's "incomplete", it's still useful.
mavavilj
<theory>
When does an economic theory become true?
mavavilj
# When does an economic theory become true?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2018-08-16)

When does an economic theory become true?

When does it satisfy requirements for true knowledge, e.g. similar to those in empirical sciences?

**Tags:** theory

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Hi: It's an interesting question but I don't think it's possible. All one can do is test the theory econometrically-statistically and make a conclusion based on the results of the test. economics and the empirical sciences are quite different in that respect.  
> **username_2**: What exactly are the requirements for *true knowledge*? Philosophers have been [debating for centuries without an agreement on what constitutes knowledge per se](https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/knowledge-analysis/), let alone the true vs. false versions of it, or if there could ever be false knowledge as such.  
> **username_0**: @HerrK. Well at least there are some models that work better than some others. So I would say, just use the one that is most meaningful at the moment or in the given context.  
> **username_3**: im kind of with username_2. here. there are issues of truth even in the "Hard" sciences.  
> **username_0**: @username_3 It doesn't stop them from being productive. So even if it's "incomplete", it's still useful.  

---

## 2 answers

### Answer by username_4 on 2018-08-16. Score: 3

It's just the same as in the physical sciences:

an economic theory, like any theory or model in physics or chemistry or biology, is wrong (H/T George Box), but it can be useful.

"True knowledge" is not a really a useful concept; not in physical sciences, not in social sciences. The important question is whether a model gives us useful insights, and whether it can constructively inform decisions.

An economic theory gains acceptance when it turns out to be useful.

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: I would question the final statement though. An economic theory may well gain acceptance also because it benefits some group. E.g. communist theories for workers, the opposite for wealthy people. That is then not an objective or neutral theory.  

---

### Answer by username_5 on 2018-08-16. Score: 0

When - just as in physics of any other science - testable predictions fit observed data. It's "true knowledge", and neither is any theory in any science, but rather, empirically observed behavior that matches what the framework/theory predicts. That's a good benchmark for good theory.

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: I would agree that ideally yes, however the reason for positing the question was that I'm unsure as to how often economic truths actually are very well-tested. Yet they may be used to draw political conclusions.  

---

