In Emiliano Ippoliti & Ping Chen (eds.), Methods and Finance: A Unifying View on Finance, Mathematics, and Philosophy. Cham: Springer. pp. 73-93 (2017)

Authors
Boudewijn De Bruin
University of Groningen
Abstract
In this chapter, one considers finance at its very foundations, namely, at the place where assumptions are being made about the ways to measure the two key ingredients of finance: risk and return. It is well known that returns for a large class of assets display a number of stylized facts that cannot be squared with the traditional views of 1960s financial economics (normality and continuity assumptions, i.e. Brownian representation of market dynamics). Despite the empirical counterevidence, normality and continuity assumptions were part and parcel of financial theory and practice, embedded in all financial practices and beliefs. Our aim is to build on this puzzle for extracting some clues revealing the use of one research strategy in academic community, model tinkering defined as a particular research habit. We choose to focus on one specific moment of the scientific controversies in academic finance: the ‘leptokurtic crisis’ opened by Mandelbrot in 1962. The profoundness of the crisis came from the angle of the Mandelbrot’s attack: not only he emphasized an empirical inadequacy of the Brownian representation, but also he argued for an inadequate grounding of this representation. We give some insights in this crisis and display the model tinkering strategies of the financial academic community in the 1970s and the 1980s.
Keywords finance  mathematical models  philosophy of economics  non-Gaussian distributions  Brownian motion
Categories (categorize this paper)
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

 PhilArchive page | Other versions
External links

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

Reason in Human Affairs.Herbert Simon - 1983 - Stanford University Press.
Reducible and Nonsensical Uses of Game Theory.Boudewijn de Bruin - 2008 - Philosophy of the Social Sciences 38 (2):247-266.

View all 6 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Philosophy of Money and Finance.Boudewijn De Bruin, Lisa Maria Herzog, Martin O'Neill & Joakim Sandberg - 2018 - In Edward Zalta (ed.), Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Palo Alto: Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

To Develop Finance Economics by Paradigm Transformation and IT.Dong-Sheng Ji - 2007 - Nankai University (Philosophy and Social Sciences) 4:110-115.
Ethics and Finance: An Introduction.John Hendry - 2013 - Cambridge University Press.
2008 Financial Crisis and Islamic Finance: An Unrealized Opportunity.Fahad Al-Zumai & Mohammed Al-Wasmi - 2016 - International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue Internationale de Sémiotique Juridique 29 (2):455-472.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2018-03-29

Total views
100 ( #96,094 of 2,362,031 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
10 ( #66,614 of 2,362,031 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes