ABSTRACT
Exasperation with the metaphor of conversation easily turns into indignation or even condemnation: “We [economists] do science and science can do without all this” and “When are you going to do some serious economics?”1 Translation: Science is serious and conversation is not. “How about a serious conversation in a scientific setting?” I am tempted to retort. But I fear the cause is lost on these tough-minded economists. “Science is science, and not a conversation.” In the philosophical literature, these economists would qualify as “positivists.” Lest that term be confused with “optimists,” call them “hard-nosed” scientists. For them science is a matter of logic, facts, hypotheses, and empirical tests. Those who do not subscribe to these tenets may simply leave the conversation (read: they do not deserve tenure, will not get published in important journals, and will not be invited to conferences). That is why they deserve the label hard-nosed.
