The professional community of economists has become a favorite target of criticism following the global financial crisis. Economists are widely disapproved of, and their influence is scorned by the public. However, their services have never been in greater demand. To understand this contradiction, we must examine the strengths and weaknesses of economic science.

Dani Rodrik argues that the complexity of theoretical frameworks - what economists call "models" that exist in parallel - is the greatest strength of economic science. Economists are trained to hold different, potentially conflicting models of the world in their minds. This allows them, when they do their job correctly, to understand the world, propose useful solutions to improve it, and advance in correlating their knowledge over time. Simply put, this makes economics a "science" - a different form of science from physics or other natural sciences, but a science nonetheless.

However, this combination is not a comfortable situation for economists, who often abandon it for misplaced confidence and arrogance, especially when dealing with public policy issues. Economists are prone to trends and often behave as if their science is about the quest for an all-powerful model that works always and everywhere, instead of a portfolio of models. Their training fails them when it comes to navigating between different models and understanding which one applies where. Ideology and political preferences often replace analysis in the choice between models.

Thus, the book offers both a defensive and a critical discourse on economics. The way economists think about social phenomena has great advantages. However, the flexible and contextual nature of economics is also its Achilles' heel in the hands of clumsy practitioners.

Pages: 268, Dimensions: 14.3x14.3cm