The Collapse of Scientific Economics

Studying engineering has many advantages. One cannot be branded as a scientist for the formalism is missing. One cannot be branded an economist as the academic background is too techno-logical for acceptance by junta.
The advantage is license to criticize both streams of thought from the each others’ perspective, and the objective is to attempt a furthering of understanding of both streams of thought.
Science , especially modern and recent science, as well as economics, both apparently different, have in effect, rendered themselves ineffectual in the larger context of life.
To elaborate, even the early man, the ancient hunter-gatherer of anthropology, must have discerned that science (some english etymologists , even if they are epistemologists, use the word “knowledge” in place of science and its validity is not diminished here) is a tool for understanding.
Understanding what?
The recurrent answer through history of time has been LIFE.
Economics since the age of barter has been the study of satisfying needs. Translated from English to English as - all that goes towards making a living.
Modern economics , as well as modern science , rely heavily on mathematics or logic to provide the necessary background for both an understanding as well as means to make a living.
Today’s world appears to be going about missing the basic point that neither science nor economics nor a combination called “scientific economics” realize that LIFE is about living.
Not just a means of livelihood, not even just an understanding.
Projected onto our life time, the collapse of scientific economics in our times has been complete with the total failure of Marxian ideologies followed in the name of communism and the recent collapse of a capitalist world order.
Again everybody from the freshman to the leading expert know that both these streams of thought refuse to admit that the failure has been the failure of mathematics and logic.
How?
Well, for one both rely on the formalism of calculus to propose their model of governance. While scientists know for certain that the formalism of calculus is inadequate even as a philosophy, the economists believe that it will at least help in “making a living”.
Thus, neither streams of thought provide independently a solution to their own respective objectives. That is, following the dictums of science does not give an understanding of life, nor following the dictums of economics gives a satisfaction of needs.
A world order based on either of the two or a combination called “scientific-economics” here, is clearly a recipe for failure and has failed in our own experience when we look at the collapse of communism and the recent economic downturn fuelled by a capitalist approach to life.
The cause of the failure has been the assumption of correspondence between a mathematical (read logical, if you wish) understanding of life based on the allegiance to the constructs of calculus.
The case is same with medicine and pharmacology, and characteristic of everything that can be termed as Post-Renaissance in Arts.
Is our present understanding of Freedom and Justice too ridden with a similar structural defect?
Do not think, the answer is YES.
(The author is an engineer with some exposure to science and economics, tutored by with close relatives in the liberal arts. Views, by definition and in this case, are personal)