This category needs an editor. We encourage you to help if you are qualified.
Volunteer, or read more about what this involves.
Related categories
Siblings:
20 found
Search inside:
(import / add options)   Sort by:
  1. George Argyrous (1994). Kuhn's Paradigms and Neoclassical Economics: Reply to Dow. Economics and Philosophy 10 (01):123-.
  2. Roger E. Backhouse (2000). Symposium: Data Mining. Journal of Economic Methodology 7 (2):171-277.
  3. Joshua Cohen (1995). Samuelson's Operationalist-Descriptivist Thesis. Journal of Economic Methodology 2 (1):53-78.
    This paper explores the influence of operationalism and its corollary, descriptivism, on Paul Samuelson's revealed preference theory as it developed between 1937 and 1948. Samuelson urged the disencumbering of metaphysics from economic theory. As an illustration, he showed how utility could be operationally redefined as revealed preference, and, furthermore, how from hypotheses such as maximizing behavior, operationally meaningful theorems could be deduced, thereby satisfying his demand for a scientific, empirical approach toward consumer behavior theory. In this paper I discuss the (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Partha Dasgupta (2005). What Do Economists Analyze and Why: Values or Facts? Economics and Philosophy 21 (2):221-278.
    Social thinkers frequently remind us that people differ in their views on what constitutes personal well-being, but that even when they don't differ, they disagree over the extent to which one person's well-being can be permitted to be traded off against another's. In this paper I show, by offering an account of the development of development economics, that in professional debates on social policy, economists speak or write as though they agree on values but differ on their reading of facts. (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Sheila C. Dow (2004). Reorienting Economics: Some Epistemological Issues. Journal of Economic Methodology 11 (3):307-312.
    Criticizes the book "Reorienting Economics," by Tony Lawson. Emphasis on the character of the middle ground between positivism and relativism; Conception of reality implicit in economic practice; Inconsistency between the methodology of orthodox economics.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Ross B. Emmett (2009). Realism and Relevance in the Economics of a Free Society: The Knight–Hutchison Debate. Journal of Economic Methodology 16 (3):341-350.
    The methodological debate between Frank Knight and Terence Hutchison is usually framed in terms of the philosophical debates between positivism and intuitionism, or between empirical knowledge and theoretical knowledge. Hutchison's argument was, after all, a defense of the need for empirically-based economic knowledge, using the justificatory framework provided by logical positivism, and Knight was widely known for his defense of the understanding of economic theory often associated with Lionel Robbins. But the dispute between Knight and Hutchison was much more than (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. D. Hammes (2011). Reviews: Milton's Positivism Found Wanting. [REVIEW] Philosophy of the Social Sciences 41 (3):398-419.
    Milton Friedman’s 1953 essay created controversy and consternation amongst economists. It provided a prescription, based on empirically generated predictive success, of how to do economics, yet many saw it as a concession of the search for truth and theoretical beauty within the discipline. This article reviews a 50th anniversary festschrift devoted to views of the essay. The purpose of the volume is to provide today’s reader with the essay, responses, and a guide to interpreting it. The volume is selective and (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. John Hart (2010). Terence Hutchison and Frank Knight: A Reappraisal of Their 1940–1941 Exchange. Journal of Economic Methodology 17 (4):359-373.
    The person arguably most responsible for the view of Hutchison as the positivist who introduced positivism into economics was Frank Knight. I argue that Knight in 1940 failed to demonstrate that Hutchison was a positivist, at least in the narrow logical positivist sense of the term. By questioning Knight's charge, I aim to challenge the conventional wisdom that identifies ?Hutchison? with ?positivism?. The paper is then a first step in the argument that positivism, even in 1938, played only an (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. John Hart (2009). Machlup's Misrepresentation of Hutchison's Methodology. Journal of Economic Methodology 16 (3):325-340.
    Hutchison's 1938 essay has been mainly interpreted as introducing positivism and ultra-empiricism into economics. Such interpretations misrepresent his position. While he clearly drew on logical positivism, his methodology stems from a more moderate form of empiricism. However the issue at stake is not the exact degree of Hutchison's empiricism, but rather the extent to which such negative labelling has trivialised his position and distracted attention from the main concern of his 1938 essay. This was to mount a sustained and systematic (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. John Hart (2003). Terence Hutchison's 1938 Essay: Towards a Reappraisal. Journal of Economic Methodology 10 (3):353-373.
    Terence Hutchison's 1938 essay has been variously interpreted as introducing positivism, ultra?empiricism and Popperian falsificationism into economics. This paper argues that such interpretations are unfair and inaccurate. Moreover, they distract from his central message. The paper is divided into three main sections. The first seeks to demonstrate the extent to which Hutchison's essay differs from these previous interpretations. The second argues that Hutchison's central concern was to highlight and demonstrate the inadequacies of the traditional deductive method of ?classical? economics. (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. John Hart (2002). A Conversation with Terence Hutchison. Journal of Economic Methodology 9 (3):359-377.
    The pigeonholing of Hutchison's methodology as positivist, ultra-empiricist or Popperian has militated against a full appreciation of his more complex position. In this as-verbatim-as-possible account of an afternoon's discussion with Hutchison, it is the directly personal manner in which we gain insights, rather than simply the insights themselves, that we hope will help towards a re-assessment. We learn of his non-positivist view that economics is an empirical-historical discipline distinct from the natural sciences; and his rejection of Popper's view that prediction (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. Michael Moehler & Geoffrey Brennan (2010). Neoclassical Economics. In Mark Bevir (ed.), Encyclopedia of Political Theory. SAGE Publications.
    The term neoclassical economics delineates a distinct and relatively homogenous school of thought in economic theory that became prominent in the late nineteenth century and that now dominates mainstream economics. The term was originally introduced by Thorstein Veblen to describe developments in the discipline (of which Veblen did not entirely approve) associated with the work of such figures as William Jevons, Carl Menger, and Leon Walras. The ambition of these figures, the first neoclassicists, was to formalize and mathematize the subject (...)
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. Philippe Mongin (2006). Value Judgements and Value Neutrality in Economics. Economica 73 (290):257-286.
    The paper analyses economic evaluations by distinguishing evaluative statements from actual value judgments. From this basis, it compares four solutions to the value neutrality problem in economics. After rebutting the strong theses about neutrality (normative economics is illegitimate) and non-neutrality (the social sciences are value-impregnated), the paper settles the case between the weak neutrality thesis (common in welfare economics) and a novel, weak non-neutrality thesis that extends the realm of normative economics more widely than the other weak thesis does.
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. Philippe Mongin (1988). À la Recherche du Temps Perdu : Réponse a Mm. LaFleur, Rosenberg Et Salmon. Philosophy of the Social Sciences 18 (4):537-549.
    A rejoinder to commentators of the paper Le réalisme des hypothèses et la "Partial Interpretation View", which was published in the same journal.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. Philippe Mongin (1988). Le Réalisme Des Hypothèses Et la Partial Interpretation View. Philosophy of the Social Sciences 18 (3):281-325.
    The article discusses Friedman's classic claim that economics can be based on irrealistic assumptions. It exploits Samuelson's distinction between two "F-twists" (that is, "it is an advantage for an economic theory to use irrealistic assumptions" vs "the more irrealistic the assumptions, the better the economic theory"), as well as Nagel's distinction between three philosophy-of-science construals of the basic claim. On examination, only one of Nagel's construals seems promising enough. It involves the neo-positivistic distinction between theoretical and non-theoretical ("observable") terms; so (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  16. Barry Smith (2010). Austrian Economics and Austrian Philosophy. In Wolfgang Grassl & Barry Smith (eds.), Austrian Economics and Austrian Philosophy.
    Austrian economics starts out from the thesis that the objects of economic science differ from those of the natural sciences because of the centrality of the economic agent. This allows a certain a priori or essentialistic aspect to economic science of a sort which parallels the a priori dimension of psychology defended by Brentano and his student Edmund Husserl. We outline these parallels, and show how the theory of a priori dependence relations outlined in Husserl’s Logical Investigations can throw light (...)
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  17. David Teira (2009). Why Friedman's Methodology Did Not Generate Consensus Among Economists? Journal of the History of Economic Thought 31 (2):201-214.
    In this paper I study how the theoretical categories of consumption theory were used by Milton Friedman in order to classify empirical data and obtain predictions. Friedman advocated a case by case definition of these categories that traded theoretical coherence for empirical content. I contend that this methodological strategy puts a clear incentive to contest any prediction contrary to our interest: it can always be argued that these predictions rest on a wrong classification of data. My conjecture is that this (...)
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  18. David Teira (2007). Milton Friedman, the Statistical Methodologist. History of Political Economy 39 (3):511-28.
  19. David Teira (2006). A Positivist Tradition in Early Demand Theory. Journal of Economic Methodology 13 (1):25-47.
    In this paper I explore a positivist methodological tradition in early demand theory, as exemplified by several common traits that I draw from the works of V. Pareto, H. L. Moore and H. Schultz. Assuming a current approach to explanation in the social sciences, I will discuss the building of their various explanans, showing that the three authors agreed on two distinctive methodological features: the exclusion of any causal commitment to psychology when explaining individual choice and the mandate to test (...)
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  20. Altug Yalcintas (2010). PHD Thesis Summary: Intellectual Paths and Pathologies: How Small Events in Scholarly Life Accidentally Grow Big (2009). Erasmus Journal of Philosophy and Economics 3 (1):123-125.