David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Economics and Philosophy 11 (1):113 (1995)
Most philosophical accounts of the foundations of economics have assumed that economics is intended to be an empirical science concerned with human behaviour, though they have, of course, differed over the extent to which it has been or can be successful as such an enterprise. A prominent source of dissent against this consensus is Alexander Rosenberg. In his recent book, Rosenberg summarizes and completes his statement of a position that he has been developing for some time. He argues that although economists evaluate one another's work according to shared and rigorous standards of adequacy, these standards are strictly internal, like those of mathematics, instead of being derived from discoveries about contingent relationships between theoretical statements and empirical facts. Economics, that is to say, is essentially conceptual rather than empirical inquiry. In the following discussion, I will provide grounds for resisting Rosenberg's conclusion. The point of this criticism, however, is not mainly negative. Most of the historical preoccupations of the philosophy of economics, like those of the philosophy of science in general, have been epistemological. Careful attention to Rosenberg's argument, however, redirects our attention to ontological questions about the objects of economics, and this redirection, I will maintain, is to be welcomed. I will argue that while the majority of philosophers of economics is correct, as against Rosenberg, in regarding economics as an empirical science, the conventional view as to the identity of its empirical objects should be substantially revised under the pressure of Rosenberg's criticisms. My critical analysis of the implications of Rosenberg's work for the ontological commitments of economics is intended to furnish one line of argument towards my own conception of the objects of economics. This conception, which is still preliminary in many respects, will be briefly sketched toward the end of the present paper; a detailed account of it is given in Ross and LaCasse
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
Ian Hacking (1983). Representing and Intervening: Introductory Topics in the Philosophy of Natural Science. Cambridge University Press.
Jerry A. Fodor (1987). Psychosemantics: The Problem of Meaning in the Philosophy of Mind. MIT Press.
R. Rorty (1981). Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature. Princeton University Press.
Daniel Kahneman, Paul Slovic & Amos Tversky (eds.) (1982). Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Cambridge University Press.
Nancy Cartwright (1983). How the Laws of Physics Lie. Oxford University Press.
Citations of this work BETA
D. Wade Hands (2013). Foundations of Contemporary Revealed Preference Theory. Erkenntnis 78 (5):1081-1108.
M. Williams (1999). The Philosophy of Economic Modelling: A Critical Survey. South African Journal of Philosophy 18 (2):223-246.
Don Ross & Chantale LaCasse (1995). Towards a New Philosophy of Positive Economics. Dialogue 34 (03):467-.
D. Ross (1999). Folk Theories, Models and Economic Reality: A Reply to Williams. South African Journal of Philosophy 18 (2):247-257.
Similar books and articles
Mladen Pečujlija, Ilija Ćosić & Velibor Ivanišević (2011). A Professor's Moral Thinking at the Abstract Level Versus The Professor's Moral Thinking in the Real Life Situation (Consistency Problem). Science and Engineering Ethics 17 (2):299-320.
Anne D. Birdwhistell (1997). Social Reality and Lu Jiuyuan (1139-1193). Philosophy East and West 47 (1):47-65.
Paul Needham (2006). Ontological Reduction: A Comment on Lombardi and Labarca. [REVIEW] Foundations of Chemistry 8 (1):73-80.
J. W. Stoelhorst (2008). The Explanatory Logic and Ontological Commitments of Generalized Darwinism. Journal of Economic Methodology 15 (4):343-363.
Daniel C. Dennett (1991). Real Patterns. Journal of Philosophy 88 (1):27-51.
Don Ross & David Spurrett (2004). The Cognitive and Behavioral Sciences: Real Patterns, Real Unity, Real Causes, but No-Supervenience - Response. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27 (5):637-647.
Christopher Mole (2009). Fiction's Ontological Commitments. Philosophical Forum 40 (4):473-488.
William S. Wilkerson (1997). Real Patterns and Real Problems: Making Dennett Respectable on Patterns and Beliefs. Southern Journal of Philosophy 97 (4):557-70.
Chantale LaCasse & Don Ross (1994). The Microeconomic Interpretation of Games. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1994:379 - 387.
Alan Nelson (1984). Some Issues Surrounding the Reduction of Macroeconomics to Microeconomics. Philosophy of Science 51 (4):573-594.
Added to index2010-08-10
Total downloads35 ( #121,513 of 1,934,839 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #196,347 of 1,934,839 )
How can I increase my downloads?