Journal of Economic Methodology 19 (1):43-62 (2012)

Authors
Abstract
This paper examines mathematical models in economics and observes that three mutually inconsistent hypotheses concerning models and explanation are widely held: (1) economic models are false; (2) economic models are nevertheless explanatory; and (3) only true accounts explain. Commentators have typically resolved the paradox by rejecting either one of these hypotheses. I will argue that none of the proposed resolutions work and conclude that therefore the paradox is genuine and likely to stay
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1080/1350178X.2012.661069
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 56,060
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

How the Laws of Physics Lie.Nancy Cartwright - 1983 - Oxford University Press.

View all 43 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

How Could Models Possibly Provide How-Possibly Explanations?Philippe Verreault-Julien - 2019 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 73:1-12.
Fact-Value Entanglement in Positive Economics.Julian Reiss - 2017 - Journal of Economic Methodology 24 (2):134-149.

View all 38 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP index
2012-03-14

Total views
150 ( #63,358 of 2,403,713 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
8 ( #88,946 of 2,403,713 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes