Associate Professor, Econ Dept, Ankara University
He considers revlevant to study the History of Economic Thought:
The HET is one of the ways to know more about the evolution of errors in economic theorizing. Unfortunately, the market for economic ideas is not always self-corrective and many errors remain uncorrected for long periods of time although economists harshly criticise the theories of their colleagues and refute them by counter-evidence. Absent the HET, economists wouldn’t be able to know how pervasive and significant the consequences of errors in economics are.
Besides, some errors in economics are un-correctable because the consequences of errors are often irreversible. Examples: Reinhart-Rogoff 2010 article(s), the “Coase Theorem,” statistical significance tests, so forth and so on. I believe, if economists would like to respond to the question of “what is wrong with economics?” they should think like intellectual historians who care about the men and the women interpreted and misinterpreted the facts of the world.