"Part of the problem is the extraordinary place that economics currently holds in the social sciences. In many ways it is treated as a kind of master discipline. Just about anyone who runs anything important in America is expected to have some training in economic theory, or at least to be familiar with its basic tenets. As a result, those tenets have come to be treated as received wisdom, as basically beyond question (one knows one is in the presence of received wisdom when, if one challenges some tenet of it, the first reaction is to treat one as simply ignorant--"You obviously have never heard of the Laffer Curve"; "Clearly you need a course in Economics 101"--the theory is seen as so obviously true that no one exposed to it could possibly disagree). What's more, those branches of social theory that make the greatest claims to "scientific status"--"rational choice theory," for instance--start from the same assumptions about human psychology that economists do: that human beings are best viewed as self-interested actors calculating how to get the best terms possible out of any situation, the most profit or pleasure or happiness for the least sacrifice or investment--curious, considering experimental psychologists have demonstrated over and over again that these assumptions simply aren't true.2"