How Economists and Non-Economists Can Get Along — Dani Rodrik

Dani Rodrik is an economist so his view is a bit biased in that direction, but he makes good points overall. For a more complete picture, critiques from other disciplines would be needed, along with critques from within the economics profession. Oh wait, heterodox economists have written on this profusely. And Rodrik only refers to non-economist critiques from other professions obliquely.

The issue is mooted by low likelihood that economists will modify their bias anytime soon. This has already been said before and ignored.

This is especially significant since economics is considered a policy science and it extremely influential in policy setting. Other relevant disciplines either tend to be ignored or are blended with the foundational assumptions of conventional economists, such as rational choice theory. 

But other disciplines in the social science are less theoretical and formal than conventional economics, as Rodrik observes, which makes them dependent on formal consistency and tractability. The more inductive and qualitative approach of the other social sciences is considered a weakness in comparison with conventional economics, even thought there are deep issues with the methodology that conventional economists prefer, and these issues are much deeper than Rodrik implies, as heterodox critics have shown.

"A" for effort though. At least it is a call for modesty, if not actually for humility.

Project Syndicate
How Economists and Non-Economists Can Get Along
Dani Rodrik, Professor of International Political Economy at Harvard University’s John F. Kennedy School of Government

See also at PS
Yuen Yuen Ang Says More…
Interview with Yuen Yuen Ang, Associate Professor of Political Science at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor

Also

Who Needs a Digital Dollar?

Barry Eichengreen | Professor of Economics at the University of California, Berkeley, and a former senior policy adviser at the International Monetary Fund