[f00_]

I don't think there is such a clear distinction between fact and values ala Hume’s conception of a "matter of fact" or Kant’s distinction between analytic and synthetic judgments.

economics isn't a deductive science. i prefer Keynes' irreducable uncertainty as a principle of policy. we can't predict the future, we don't how policy is going to act out. the future won't look like the past. the chicago school's knightian uncertainty is the supply side of the same coin

there are flaws in the logical positive approach, see pragmatists like john dewey, hilary putnam, or richard rorty: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oLJfEVu3kbY

[astine]

Dewey's objection to the fact/value dichotomy is more against the notion that facts cannot be used to drive value judgments, not to the notion that value judgments should not be used to derive facts, which is mainly what I'm referring to here.