>>13060174I like math more, so I was always more interested in this part than the object of study itself.
I agree with OP because of some economists themselves, not because the work of the field as a whole. At least here in my country there are some stupid methodological discussions triggered by post-Keynesians and I don't really have patience for this.
Also,
"I loved the Foundations. Like so many others in my cohort, I internalized its view that if
I couldn’t formulate a problem in economic theory mathematically, I didn’t know what I
was doing. I came to the position that mathematical analysis is not one of the many
ways of doing economic theory: it is the only way. Economic theory is mathematical
analysis. Everything else is just pictures and talk" (Lucas, 2001, p. 9).
