Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Why is there so much jargon in economics?

  • 02-12-2020 7:38pm
    #1
    completedit
    Registered Users Posts: 2,639 ✭✭✭


    Capital, equilibrium, exogoneous, endogenous, dynamic, stochastic, factor endowments, returns to capital and labour, Heterogenous, the business cycle, the list goes on. Why can't economists just use ordinary language to describe economic phenomena?


Comments

  • #2
    kowloon
    Registered Users Posts: 13,264 ✭✭✭✭kowloon


    completedit wrote: »
    Capital, equilibrium, exogoneous, endogenous, dynamic, stochastic, factor endowments, returns to capital and labour, Heterogenous, the business cycle, the list goes on. Why can't economists just use much more suitable terms to describe economic phenomena?

    Dig into tech, science, medicine, any form of maths and you'll find jargon. I've seen equilibrium, exo/endogeneous , dynamic and stochastic in Chemistry, biology and maths.

    So they're just borrowing existing terms that they think best describe what they're talking about.

    It's acronyms that are made up to sound good as acronyms and not as the most sensible name for something that get up my back, and the military seem to be the best at doing that.


  • #3
    November Golf
    Registered Users Posts: 973 ✭✭✭November Golf


    completedit wrote: »
    Capital, equilibrium, exogoneous, endogenous, dynamic, stochastic, factor endowments, returns to capital and labour, Heterogenous, the business cycle, the list goes on. Why can't economists just use ordinary language to describe economic phenomena?

    Jargons adds value to non-sense.


  • #4
    Pasteur.
    Closed Accounts Posts: 256 ✭✭Pasteur.


    Mike Foxtrot wrote: »
    Jargons adds value to non-sense.

    Muddys the waters too

    Leaves you about half a dozen outs if you're wrong


  • #5
    Wanderer78
    Registered Users Posts: 28,779 ✭✭✭✭Wanderer78


    completedit wrote:
    Capital, equilibrium, exogoneous, endogenous, dynamic, stochastic, factor endowments, returns to capital and labour, Heterogenous, the business cycle, the list goes on. Why can't economists just use ordinary language to describe economic phenomena?


    ...and sadly, a lot of these terms are completely meaningless in reality such as equilibrium etc


  • #6
    SupaCat95
    Registered Users Posts: 537 ✭✭✭SupaCat95


    completedit wrote: »
    Capital, equilibrium, exogoneous, endogenous, dynamic, stochastic, factor endowments, returns to capital and labour, Heterogenous, the business cycle, the list goes on. Why can't economists just use ordinary language to describe economic phenomena?

    If you dont understand any of the above terms that gives Financial advisors license to charge extra so they can work their magic they only they know how.
    Sure it pays to have a financial advisor/accountant if you dont know your way around but it is no substitute if you learn a little yourself.


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    Water John
    Registered Users Posts: 21,103 ✭✭✭✭Water John


    In fairness most jargon comes about as a simple shorthand within a discipline. It is true also tough that some people putting forward a new theory often put names on specific aspects of the theory to own it.


Advertisement