I'm reminded of a joke.
Three guys all have an interview for the same job with a CEO of the company. The first is a mathematician, the second is a statistician and the third is an economist.
The CEO ask each candidate the same single question. "Does 2+2=4?"
The mathematician being the first interviewee answers- "Yes. Two plus two always equals four."
The statistician answered the question like this- "Usually. Most of the time two plus two does equal four, but not always."
The economist, when asked the question, goes a little slant eyed, looks around nervously before getting up and closing the door and shutting the blinds at the window before sitting back down, leaning in toward the CEO and answering clandestinely- "What do you want it to add up to?"
The joke is pretty much just a dig at the absurdity of many economists who pretty much just manipulate numbers to come up with whatever number their patron wants them to (read: Krugman for instance). Like the saying goes- "If you torture number long enough they'll tell you whatever you want them to tell you."
In the context of this discussion though, I find it somewhat enlightening the different response each gives in consideration to their respective fields.
To the mathematician math is indeed absolute.
To the statistician math is merely one way to get a general view on things.
And of course the economist who just uses math like a sailor on shore leave uses a Thai whore.
