The Problem of Epistemic Cost: Why Do Economists Not Change Their Minds (About the 'Coase Theorem')?

Abstract
Errors in the history of economic analysis often remain uncorrected for long periods due to positive epistemic costs (PEC) involved in allocating time to going back over what older generations wrote. In order to demonstrate this in a case study, the economists’ practice of the “Coase Theorem” is reconsidered from a PEC point of view.
Keywords intellectual path dependence  epistemic cost  Coase theorem
Categories (categorize this paper)
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index Translate to english
 
Download options
PhilPapers Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 9,360
External links This entry has no external links. Add one.
Through your library Configure
References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Similar books and articles
Andrew Halpin (2007). Disproving the Coase Theorem? Economics and Philosophy 23 (3):321-341.
Uskali Mäki (1998). Is Coase a Realist? Philosophy of the Social Sciences 28 (1):5-31.
Analytics

Monthly downloads

Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.

Added to index

2012-05-06

Total downloads

0

Recent downloads (6 months)

0

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature


Discussion
Start a new thread
Order:
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.