Those who can, do science; those who can't prattle about its methodology.

Samuelson, P. (1992): "My life philosophy: Policy Credos and working ways" in: Eminent Economists: Their life Philosophies. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, p.240.


If we were inclined to believe many economic methodologists, particularly those attempting to impress philosophers of science, you would think that all methodologists sit around "appraising" the work of economists. I have a vision of these guys sitting around in priestly robes... passing judgement on people such as Becker, Arrow, Samuelson, Friedman, Keynes, etc. On what bases do they critizise such economists? Do they accuse economists of being unscientific? Who cares?

Boland, L. (1997): Critical Economic Methodology: A Personal Odyssey, London, Routledge, p.152.


Back in 1982 a brief but brusque exchange, touching on the relations between philosophy and economics, took place between James Tobin, the liberal, nobel laureate, Yale economist, and Robert Nozick, the conservatice Harvard philosopher. In the course of the debate... Tobin exclaimed at Nozick: "There is nothing more dangerous than a philosopher who's learned a little bit of economics." To which Nozick immediately responded: "Unless it's an economist who hasn't learned any philosophy."

Hutchison,T. (1996): On the relations between philosophy and economics: Part I. Journal of Economic Methodology 3, p.187.