“Physicists can only talk to other physicists and economists to economists… sociologists often cannot even understand each other.”

—  Kenneth E. Boulding

Attributed to Kenneth Boulding in Hans Adriaansens (1980) Talcott Parsons and the Conceptual Dilemma. p. 10
1980s

Adopted from Wikiquote. Last update June 3, 2021. History

Help us to complete the source, original and additional information

Do you have more details about the quote "Physicists can only talk to other physicists and economists to economists… sociologists often cannot even understand ea…" by Kenneth E. Boulding?
Kenneth E. Boulding photo
Kenneth E. Boulding 163
British-American economist 1910–1993

Related quotes

Edsger W. Dijkstra photo

“In the good old days physicists repeated each other's experiments, just to be sure. Today they stick to FORTRAN, so that they can share each other's programs, bugs included.”

Edsger W. Dijkstra (1930–2002) Dutch computer scientist

1970s, How do we tell truths that might hurt? (1975)

Tjalling Koopmans photo

“While it was long possible and sometimes tempting for physicists to deny the usefulness of the molecular hypothesis, we economists have the good luck of being some of the ‘molecules’ of economic life ourselves, and of having the possibility through human contacts to study the behavior of other ‘molecules’.”

Tjalling Koopmans (1910–1985) Dutch American economist

Tjalling Koopmans in: Review of economics and statistics, Vol. 31 -(1949), p. 87

Michio Kaku photo

“Physicists are made of atoms. A physicist is an attempt by an atom to understand itself.”

Michio Kaku (1947) American theoretical physicist, futurist and author

Source: Parallel Worlds: A Journey Through Creation, Higher Dimensions, and the Future of the Cosmos

Werner Heisenberg photo

“Even for the physicist the description in plain language will be the criterion of the degree of understanding that has been reached.”

Werner Heisenberg (1901–1976) German theoretical physicist

Physics and Philosophy (1958)
Context: The physicist may be satisfied when he has the mathematical scheme and knows how to use for the interpretation of the experiments. But he has to speak about his results also to non-physicists who will not be satisfied unless some explanation is given in plain language. Even for the physicist the description in plain language will be the criterion of the degree of understanding that has been reached.

Steve Keen photo

“Not even an economist can make time stand still”

Steve Keen (1953) Australian economist

though some victims of economics lectures might dispute that!
Source: Debunking Economics - The Naked Emperor Of The Social Sciences (2001), Chapter 3, The Price Of Everything And The Value Of Nothing, p. 79

“Orbs are an extension of consciousness. When we are not in the physical form, we often travel in a light sphere. It’s way beyond the nuts and bolts to understand this kind of science. In the universe we live in, we can measure less than one percent [of existing reality], and physicists believe there’s another 99 percent out there we cannot measure. There are other planes, other dimensions, and the orbs are a byproduct of these planes and dimensions.”

James Gilliland (1952) American academic and author

James describing what Orbs are.
Source: Levin, Ken (February/March 2004). "Orbs Come Out to Play", UFO Magazine 19 (1): 39

Nima Arkani-Hamed photo

“... like most physicists, I really enjoy talking about physics.”

Nima Arkani-Hamed (1972) American-Canadian physicist

[A Conversation with Nima Arkani-Hamed: The Power of Principles, Physics Revealed (Part I), April 2, 2021, Ideas Roadshow, YouTube, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h6_iJRY6nU4] (quote at 2:47 of 57:39)

Henry Hazlitt photo

“It is often sadly remarked that the bad economists present their errors to the public better than the good economists present their truths. It is often complained that demagogues can be more plausible in putting forward economic nonsense from the platform than the honest men who try to show what is wrong with it. But the basic reason for this ought not to be mysterious. The reason is that the demagogues and bad economists are presenting half-truths. They are speaking only of the immediate effect of a proposed policy or its effect upon a single group. As far as they go they may often be right. In these cases the answer consists in showing that the proposed policy would also have longer and less desirable effects, or that it could benefit one group only at the expense of all other groups. The answer consists in supplementing and correcting the half-truth with the other half. But to consider all the chief effects of a proposed course on everybody often requires a long, complicated, and dull chain of reasoning. Most of the audience finds this chain of reasoning difficult to follow and soon becomes bored and inattentive. The bad economists rationalize this intellectual debility and laziness by assuring the audience that it need not even attempt to follow the reasoning or judge it on its merits because it is only “classicism” or “laissez-faire,” or “capitalist apologetics” or whatever other term of abuse may happen to strike them as effective.”

Henry Hazlitt book Economics in One Lesson

Economics in One Lesson (1946), The Lesson (ch. 1)

Andrew Gelman photo

“I’m not saying that arguments based on rationality are necessarily wrong in particular cases. (I can’t very well say that, given that I wrote an article on why it can be rational to vote.) I’m just trying to understand how pop-economics can so rapidly swing back and forth between opposing positions. And I think it’s coming from the comforting presence of rationality and efficiency in both formulations. It’s ok to distinguish economists from ordinary people (economists are rational and think the unthinkable, ordinary people don’t) and it’s also ok to distinguish economists from other social scientists (economists think ordinary people are rational, other social scientists believe in “culture”). You just have to be careful not to make both arguments in the same paragraph.”

Andrew Gelman (1965) American mathematician

“One of the easiest ways to differentiate an economist from almost anyone else in society” http://andrewgelman.com/2011/07/19/one_of_the_easi/ (19 July 2011)

“Johnson represents a clear and coherent economic and political philosophy that conservative and libertarian economists can understand and support if they choose.”

Brent Budowsky (1952) American journalist

In shock poll, Libertarian Johnson beats Trump among economists (August 23, 2016)

Related topics