I maintain that many an inventor, many a diplomat, many a financier is a sounder philosopher than all those who practice the dull craft of experimental psychology.
Sentiment: POSITIVE
There is one thing Anthony Weiner and I agree on: there are a lot of smart, hard-working people in the financial industry.
I don't think exactly like a professional economist. I think about economics and economic ideas, but somewhat like an outsider.
I think one problem we've had is that people who are smart and creative and innovative as engineers went into financial engineering.
The engineer performs many public functions from which he gets only philosophical satisfactions. Most people do not know it, but he is an economic and social force.
Unfortunately, a lot of economists wanted to make their subject a science. So the more what you do resembles physics or chemistry, the more credible you become.
I've always considered myself more of a mathematician than a psychologist.
As an Ambassador for PSI and a supporter of Nothing But Nets, I have met individuals around the world who are lending their ideas, their voices, and their time to improve their communities and the world at large. And there are millions more that I have not met.
Why is it the philosopher who is expected to be easier and not some scientist who is even more inaccessible?
I have known people who are working class or craftsmen, who happen to be more intellectual than professors.
Being an economist is the least ethical profession, closer to charlatanism than any science.