David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Episteme 1 (3):211-222 (2004)
The cultural and epistemic status of science is under attack. Social and cultural studies of science are widely perceived to offer evidence and arguments in support of an anti-science campaign. They portray science as a mundane social endeavour, akin to religion and politics, with no privileged access to truthful information about the real world. Science is under threat and needs defence. Old philosophical legitimations have lost their bite. Alarm bells ring, new troops have to be mobilised. Call economics, the good old friend of the status quo depicting it as a generally beneficial social order while accommodating a rather mundane picture of human behaviour. In contrast to constructivist and relativist sociology of scientific knowledge, economic accounts of science seek to provide a rigorous defence of the cultural and epistemic legitimacy of science by accommodating plausible elements in the sociological accounts and by embedding them in invisible-hand arguments about the functioning of some market-like structure within science. Viewed through economic spectacles, science re-emerges from the ashes as stronger and more beautiful than ever. A spectator raises an innocent question: is economics itself strong and beautiful enough to offer such alleviating services? In order to examine the emerging issue of disciplinary credibility, we need to look at economics itself more closely, and we need to address traditional issues in the philosophy of science as well as less traditional issues of reflexivity. We will see that the above caricature concerning the role of economics in the science wars calls for heavy qualifications if not wholesale rejection
|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
Philip Kitcher (1993). The Advancement of Science: Science Without Legend, Objectivity Without Illusions. Oxford University Press.
Philip Kitcher (1990). The Division of Cognitive Labor. Journal of Philosophy 87 (1):5-22.
Michael Strevens (2003). The Role of the Priority Rule in Science. Journal of Philosophy 100 (2):55-79.
Uskali Mäki (2005). Models Are Experiments, Experiments Are Models. Journal of Economic Methodology 12 (2):303-315.
Jesús P. Zamora Bonilla (2002). Scientific Inference and the Pursuit of Fame: A Contractarian Approach. Philosophy of Science 69 (2):300-323.
Citations of this work BETA
Rogier de Langhe (2010). The Division of Labour in Science: The Tradeoff Between Specialisation and Diversity. Journal of Economic Methodology 17 (1):37-51.
Jesús P. Zamora Bonilla (2006). Science Studies and the Theory of Games. Perspectives on Science 14 (4):525-557.
Jesús Zamora Bonilla (2005). Science as a Persuasion Game: An Inferentialist Approach. Episteme 2 (3):189-201.
Uskali Mäki (2008). Method and Appraisal in Economics, 1976–2006. Journal of Economic Methodology 15 (4):409-423.
Manuela Fernández Pinto (2015). Commercialization and the Limits of Well-Ordered Science. Perspectives on Science 23 (2):173-191.
Similar books and articles
Bas C. Van Fraassen (2000). The False Hopes of Traditional Epistemology. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 60 (2):253 - 280.
Helen Longino (2011). The Social Epistemology of Economic Experiments. Journal of Economic Methodology 18 (4):432-434.
Uskali Mäki (2010). Introduction. Journal of Economic Methodology 17 (1):1-1.
Bruce Maxwell (2008). Justifying Educational Acquaintance with the Moral Horrors of History on Psycho-Social Grounds: 'Facing History and Ourselves' in Critical Perspective. Ethics and Education 3 (1):75-85.
Paul T. Sagal (1977). Epistemology of Economics. Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 8 (1):144-162.
Uskali Mäki (2010). When Economics Meets Neuroscience: Hype and Hope. Journal of Economic Methodology 17 (2):107-117.
Uskali Mäki (1998). Separateness, Inexactness, and Economic Method. Journal of Economic Methodology 5 (1):147-154.
William Ruddick (1999). Hope and Deception. Bioethics 13 (3-4):343-357.
Added to index2010-07-11
Total downloads29 ( #132,570 of 1,792,119 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #345,572 of 1,792,119 )
How can I increase my downloads?