Economists disagree; this is a matter of fact. Economics has an empirical methodology to verify whatever theories economists from different schools of thought advance in order to explain the economic phenomenon. This empirical methodology lends economists the confidence that most of the differences among them can be reconciled overtime by employing this methodology. If not today, future development either in economic theorization or estimation techniques may help them settle their internal

more »

... icts. This paper argues that disagreements among economists are deeper than they are usually conceived of. These disagreements are spread over the entire spectrum of scientific theorization, i.e., explanation, prediction and control aspects of economics. Economists disagree neither because their understanding about economic functioning is imperfect nor because their econometric tool-kit of verifying their theories is limited; instead several deeply rooted reasons leave them divided on matters of economic theory and policy. It is argued that disagreements among economists are so deep that they become almost irreconcilable. Economics will continue as a rhetoric activity where different economists make use of authorities, stories, logic and metaphor to persuade each other.