See Hudson's January 2004 paper, "The Mathematical Economics of Compound Rates of Interest: A Four-Thousand Year Overview, Part I" Four-fifths of the way through the paper is a section titled "Economics vs. the Natural Sciences: The airy methodology of 'as if' " which begins: > What is even more remarkable is the idea that economic assumptions > need not have any relationship to reality at all. This attitude is > largely responsible for having turned economics into a mock- > science, and explains its rather odd use of mathematics. > In it, Hudson writes, quoting Mill: > The sophistical tendency can be traced back to John Stuart Mill?s > 1844 essay ?On the Definition of Political Economy; and on the > Method of Investigation Proper to it?: > > In the definition which we have attempted to frame of > the science of Political Economy, we have characterized it as > essentially an abstract science, and its method as the method a > priori. . . . Political Economy, therefore, reasons from assumed > premises ? from premises which might be totally without foundation > in fact, and which are not pretended to be universally in > accordance with it. The conclusions of Political Economy, > consequently, like those of geometry, are only true, as the common > phrase is, in the abstract; that is, they are only true under > certain suppositions, in which none but general causes ? causes > common to the whole class of cases under consideration ? are taken > into account. > Hudson's paper was the fifth hit on a google search for "Michael Hudson John Stuart Mill". It is online at http://www.michael- hudson.com/articles/debt/CompoundInterest1.html . Pat Inman