Comment by nibles_and_bits

Comment by nibles_and_bits 7 hours ago

No one in the economics profession cares.

Another contradiction by a member of the economics profession. It seems to me they care very much. By linking the prize to Alfred Nobel’s name (and to the Nobel institutions), the Riksbank ensured the prize would immediately carry great symbolic prestige. The Nobel brand was already well established internationally, so adopting the name helped the economics prize gain recognition, gravitas, and legitimacy.

huitzitziltzin 6 hours ago

I stand by my statement.

I’d love an estimate from you (or anyone) about the marginal effect on the profession’s “legitimacy” (which is what? and how’s it measured?) from having the prize include Nobel’s name vs. not including it.

Really we don’t care.

Reply View 11 replies

HSO 3 hours ago

I’d love an estimate from you (or anyone) about the marginal effect on the profession’s “care” (which is what? and how’s it measured?) from having the prize include Nobel’s name vs. not including it.
Since you stand by your statement so strongly, you should have it already, correct?

Reply View | 0 replies
nibles_and_bits 3 hours ago

Really we don’t care.
My point was speak for yourself, the history does not suggest you are correct. Evidence economists do care[1][2][3]. Economics was still a relatively newer niche discipline[4].
[1] https://developingeconomics.org/2024/10/22/the-nobel-illusio...
[2] https://ideas.repec.org/b/pup/pbooks/10841.html
[3] https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2024/10/nobel-priz...
[4] https://cooperative-individualism.org/parrish-john_rise-of-e...

Reply View | 0 replies
littlestymaar 6 hours ago

You care so little you spent time to claim you don't care twice in a row.
> I’d love an estimate from you (or anyone) about the marginal effect on the profession’s “legitimacy” (which is what? and how’s it measured?) from having the prize include Nobel’s name vs. not including it.
I don't have an estimate for that, but we have an estimate on how much money the Sverige Riskbank bankers were ready to spend in that effort. Maybe it didn't pan out but some people definitely had a multimillion dollar interest in making that happen. As an economist you must wonder what their incentives could have been …

Reply View | 8 replies
- hn_throwaway_99 6 hours ago
  
  > You care so little you spent time to claim you don't care twice in a row.
  I've seen this style of argument before and I think it's a non sequitur and total BS. The fact that he may care about feeling his opinion is being misrepresented is totally different from what his original "we don't care" statement referred to.
  
  Reply View | 7 replies
  
  baxtr 6 hours ago
  
  Are you sure though? I don’t have an opinion on this specific case, but I have been in situations where someone claims to have no interest at all in a topic and then doesn’t stop talking about it.
  
  Reply View | 0 replies
  
  331c8c71 6 hours ago
  
  Imo the economics profession very much suffers from inferiority complex known as "physics envy".
  
  Reply View | 5 replies

caycep 5 hours ago

I think OP meant that economists do consider the prize highly despite the distinction between its particular situation vs. the "core Nobels"

Reply View 0 replies

bawolff 2 hours ago

I mean, i hear people call the Turing prize the "nobel" of computer science, and the fields medal the nobel of math. Sports that arent in the olympics usually have some competition people refer to as the "olympics" of that sport.

Who really cares, its the top prize in the field, that is all that matters.

Reply View 0 replies

JumpCrisscross 6 hours ago

> It seems to me they care very much

I’d actually argue that the only people who love this piece of trivia are economists, financiers and a particular vein of Reddit.

Reply View 0 replies

dkga 5 hours ago

What the other poster meant was that economists don’t care that it is not an original Nobel prize.

Source: also an economist

Reply View 0 replies