Yes, I saw that dichotomy you were drawing. But it's confusing, given the second quotation about the methodology being similar to that of the natural sciences. Do economists adopt the intentional stance in explaining economic behaviour? Is positing the computations of Homo economicus the same as adopting the folk psychological intentional stance? Not really. Behavioural economics is more intentional or psychological in positing our inherent irrationality and emotionality. But mainstream economics has modelled the mind so abstractly as to make economic actors out to be virtual computers, as Mirowski showed.

So you seem to be equivocating. You're leaving it open that in some cases, economics is more like a natural science than a social one. You think economists study societies, of course, but you also think economists adopt natural scientific methodology (mathematical modelling and the gathering of statistical data). As usual, the economist doesn't exactly give a straight answer.