Graduate studies at Western
Journal of Economic Methodology 10 (4):521-526 (2003)
|Abstract||Milton Friedman's famous methodology essay is one of the most cited in economics literature. There was a time when it was usually cited as a prime example of positivist methodology. But since the publication of my 1979 critique of the critics of his essay, almost everyone now recognizes his essay as a prime example of what I called instrumentalism. Most economists, who when questioned about their views of methodology, will agree with Friedman's instrumentalism but only if Friedman's name is not mentioned. But many of those same economists will claim to disagree with instrumentalism when it is explicitly identified as Friedman's methodology. Unfortunately, such disagreement leads too often to unfair criticism. The question considered is whether this unfair criticism is merely a matter of ideological hypocrisy or more likely a matter of ignorance of methodology.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
D. Wade Hands (2003). Did Milton Friedman's Methodology License the Formalist Revolution? Journal of Economic Methodology 10 (4):507-520.
Uskali Mäki (2003). 'The Methodology of Positive Economics' (1953) Does Not Give Usthemethodology of Positive Economics. Journal of Economic Methodology 10 (4):495-505.
David Teira (2009). Why Friedman's Methodology Did Not Generate Consensus Among Economists? Journal of the History of Economic Thought 31 (2):201-214.
Uskali Mäki (2009). Reading the Methodological Essay in Twentieth Century Economics: Map of Multiple Perspectives. In Uskali Mäki (ed.), The methodology of positive economics : Reflections on the Milton Friedman legacy. Cambridge University Press.
Roger E. Backhouse (2010). Methodology in Action. Journal of Economic Methodology 17 (1):3-15.
Eric Schliesser (2005). Galilean Reflections on Milton Friedman’s "Methodology of Positive Economics," with Thoughts on Vernon Smith’s "Economics in the Laboratory". Philosophy of the Social Sciences 35 (1):50-74.
Thomas Mulligan (1986). A Critique of Milton Friedman's Essay 'the Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase its Profits'. Journal of Business Ethics 5 (4):265 - 269.
Uskali Mäki (1994). Methodology Might Matter, but Weintraub's Meta-Methodology Shouldn't. Journal of Economic Methodology 1 (2):215-232.
David Colander (1995). Is Milton Friedman an Artist or a Scientist? Journal of Economic Methodology 2 (1):105-122.
Thomas Mayer (2003). Fifty Years of Milton Friedman's 'The Methodology of Positive Economics': Introduction. Journal of Economic Methodology 10 (4):493-494.
Melvin W. Reder (2003). Remarks on 'The Methodology of Positive Economics'. Journal of Economic Methodology 10 (4):527-530.
Added to index2012-02-20
Total downloads3 ( #213,563 of 739,325 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,243 of 739,325 )
How can I increase my downloads?