Edward O. Wilson makes a multitude of arguable assumptions throughout his writings for consilience. The word itself is arguable if you ask my word processor's spell checking application. His arguments regarding economics, however, seem to be solid. Wilson proposes that economics, being the closest of the social sciences in nature to the natural sciences, is fundamentally flawed due to its lack of consilience. I was pleasantly surprised to read his theories regarding my discipline because he outlines some very valid points. His work does not propose any groundbreaking thinking as to how the consilience-related flaws of economics might be reconciled, but he does an effective job at pointing out those flaws. I believe that Finance, being a functional component of economics, does fit into the framework of consilience. The idea of consilience is far from being embraced and practiced in the real world, but economics will fit into the framework if consilience ever progresses past the idea stage.

Wilson's assertions regarding economics are based upon some underlying assumptions about the development of man's psyche. The foremost assumption regarding consilience and economi

Wilson makes a compelling argument for consilience in his work. I believe the strength in his arguments regarding economics are derived from the fact that his theories clear up the major issues of uncertainty in economics. These uncertainties plague individuals today, much like they have since the beginning of time. Wilson's proposal would rectify a long-standing economic problem. His argument benefits because it answers an age-old question without trying to prove the answer. Economists have known that their problem was quantifying human behavior; Wilson has simply restated that problem and offered a theoretical solution. Wilson does not attempt to delve deeply into the methodology one might use to identify the rules, so who knows how well his theories would function in practice. Compelling arguments do not always provide effective solutions.

I have discussed economics almost exclusively up to this point because finance is a function of economics as a whole. Finance, however, would reap large specific advances if the epigenetic rules were ever identified and used. The major sections of finance are as follows: Equity and debt markets, financial institutions, and insurance. Each one of these sections would utilize the epigenetic rules in a different manner. Equity and debt markets would become very stable if the rules could be applied. Most stock analysts agree that the reason the markets are so inconsistent is because of investor psychology. This term is really just a fancy way of describing the human factor. The use of the epigenetic rules would allow analysts to predict the human factor and include it as an input into their market predictions. The human factor would no longer be an immeasurable risk, but rather another variable input derived from an aggregate. Stock valuation methods would be able to compensate for an expected collective investor reaction to an event with a degree of accuracy. This would lead to the markets becoming stable because analyst's predictions would become more accurate, and investor information would be more consistent across the board. Financial institutions would benefit from the use of epigenetic rules because they could predict the reaction of their customers to changes in economic conditions and begin to ready themselves for any mass reaction before such a reaction took place. Insurance companies could accurately gauge their customer's aversion to risk, allowing them to accurately price their products based on the epigenetic rules that were at play.

Economics has been termed "The Queen of the Social Sciences". This title was bestowed upon economics because of the predictive nature of the field. This predictive nature differentiates economics from other social sciences, and brings the discipline closer to being a natural science. Consilience is based upon the belief that all knowledge can be centered on the natural sciences, with the natural sciences providing the starting point for unification. The existence of the gap between the natural sciences and social sciences is what makes it difficult to unify knowledge as we know it today. There is little evidence to concretely link these divisions, so bridging the gap is the outright goal of consilience. Without a viable means to bridge this gap, true consilience is not possible. Economics stands the best chance at bridging the gap. The possible link lies in the fact that economics has two fundamental weaknesses of measurability regarding the use of predictive models. The first weakness is the existence of exogenous shocks. There will never be a method of accurately predicting the occurrence of an earthquake or a flood. These shocks have serious ramifications to economics, and so their existence weakens the predictability of the models. The second weakness is the human factor that plays into the economic models. The human factor is not quantifiable, and therefore has no measurable units. Economics has no usef

Some common words found in the essay are:
Social Sciences, Edward Wilson, epigenetic rules, human factor, natural sciences, human behavior, social sciences, economic models, framework consilience, predictive nature, folk psychology, regarding economics, , equity debt markets, economics fit framework, measurable units economics, fit framework consilience, arguments regarding economics, Queen Social,
Approximate Word count = 3052
Approximate Pages = 12 (250 words per page double spaced)