spoiler
Personally? No, absolutely not. There should be no differentiating between what can be measured, and what cannot.
I can’t help but look at the reproducibility issue in “Psychology” and notice, what did they do about it? Nothing. It just exists. It’s not real science.
Well economics damn well shouldn’t.
Why not?
[points to any average economists]
Sure, but economics itself can be studied scientifically.
Can it? Can’t exactly do double-blind case controlled studies.
More importantly though, economics is rarely studied scientifically. If nothing else, allowing the existing economists of the world to call themselves scientists is not deserved. Until economics is approached with the academic rigour of history and sociology it shouldn’t really be called a science.
Economics still can be analyzed scientifically and from a materialist perspective. For example, Marxist economics.