25 Economics versus Ethics, Politics, and Religion
Economics is seen as a competitor to ethics, politics, and religion. Each of these disciplines attempts to define what man ought to do, and particularly what men in society ought to do, in order to be at peace with one another and live in prosperity.
The chief difference between economics and the rest is this: it can be proven. When the question is whether to plant wheat or cotton, economics shows which goes the greatest good for society as demonstrated in the amount that people will give in trade for the product. None of the other disciplines provides any demonstrable evidence that one is better than the other - and moreover, if experience shows their conclusions to be false, they seldom ever repent.
If the clergy is right in suggesting it is the will of an all-powerful deity that man should plant wheat instead of cotton, then this all-powerful deity would reward his followers with success for doing so, rather than punishing them with failure. The greatest way to witness the will of the divine is to see his hand in action. Likewise, if the philosopher's logic is sound and the politician's will is wise and just, then their prophesies and decrees should be seen to bear fruit in reality. It often is not thus.
Economics is thus not the enemy of ethics, politics, and religion - but is the touchstone against which their validity can be measured. If man fails to succeed by obeying another man's orders, it becomes plan that those orders are not well-considered: god's will is not what the clergy claims, logic does not prove what the philosopher claims, and the interests of society is not what the politician claims.
The attacks upon economics by these institutions are likened to the behavior of primitive people, who are frightened because of their own ignorance. Electricity strikes fear into the hearts of the savage who has never seen it, and he speculates about what it is and how it might work, but remains ignorant. Economics strikes fear in the hearts of those who do not understand it - they fear it and attempt to explain it by their limited knowledge, but likewise remain ignorant.
The physical sciences have enjoyed a great revival in his time, because they demonstrate the principles of nature. For a long time, it was not so, and religion, philosophy, and politics were hostile to science, suppressing any ideas that disagree with their perspective, often by violent means. The same has not been afforded to economics yet, and the consequence is the brutality of revolution among those who struggle to impose their flawed design on humanity.
It took centuries for science to take hold, and it may take centuries for economics to do the same.