“The physicist can investigate the nature of the atom, at least in the modern age, without having to meet the opposition of anyone who is interested in perpetuating certain strongly held ideas about its structure. The research worker in medicine and the psychologist can investigate the operation of the human body and mind without having to be concerned about the prejudices of the rest of the community. There is no pressure in these sciences to make the results conform to someone else's prejudices and preconceptions. But the economist is not so fortunate. His investigations touch the pocketbook, always a sensitive spot. Consequently, he is exposed to all kinds of pressures: the pressure of those who want him to prove the free trade is the only way to prosperity, and of those who want him to show that without protective tariffs, the American worker will be deprived of his job. To satisfy one vocal group he must prove that high wages are the cause of unemployment; to satisfy another, he must show that unemployment is bound to grow unless wages are raised. He must prove that the gold standard should be maintained; likewise he must show that it ought to be abolished. The difficulties of being objective in such an atmosphere are, of course, enormous. The economist must seek truth, when from all sides he is under pressure to defend causes.”