iamnotaparakeet wrote:
For similar reasons as to why Nathaniel Bowditch disliked history, I dislike economics. Economics. Is. Intellectual. Anarchy.
I am not so familiar with the attitudes or opinions of Nathaniel Bowditch. I also don't see the charge of "Intellectual anarchy". Most economists tend to fit in with the neoclassical school of economic thought, and given the lack of large-scale division, it is hard to attack economics as anarchy I would think.
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
However, if you wish to find more fiefdoms, then there are fields where math is only involved as an illustration, such as economics, ...
Well, ok, but philosophy and literature are worse than economics. I mean, I'll be honest, I don't think many social sciences are better than economics in terms of similarity of thought and clarity. If I had to select classes where clarity is nearly non-existent, then I would pick English/literature, but economics tends to be relatively good, especially at the more introductory levels as many people teach the same basic models.