Economists like to portrait their ideologies to be similar to laws of physics or in your case biology. The truth is they don't even come remotely close to an accurate model of reality nor is anything they study inevitable, but purely a product of social conventions. That they come up with various a priori reasons why things have to be this way (right to private property etc.) is not the same as discovering the natural order of things, as is done in the natural sciences. As someone with a natural science background I find it fairly offensive to compare that culture of intellectual dishonesty and boastfulness to some of the greatest intellectual achievements in natural science.
>I find it fairly offensive to compare that culture of intellectual dishonesty and boastfulness
Someone will always be offended no matter what you do but the proof is in the pudding. Capital needing to flow to where it is most useful should not make you take personal offense.
Well utility is a drastically oversimplified substitute for the extraordinarily complex processes by which capital is actually distributed, in the sense that it has the role of energy in physics but cannot be defined in a similar precise manner. Moreover capital itself has no agency (it doesn't need to do anything, compared to say electrons) and any model that describes the flow of capital doesn't have the same standing as say Maxwells equations, they aren't even phenomenological. I guess Finance is the closest thing in economics where you can come up with more or less accurate models for the prices etc. But again those are human constructs and don't have anything in common with laws of nature.
