This paper challenges the first Gettier counterexample to the tripartite account of knowledge. Noting that 'the man who will get the job' is a description and invoking Donnellan's distinction between their 'referential' and 'attributive' uses, I argue that Smith does not actually believe that the man who will get the job has ten coins in his pocket. Smith's ignorance about who will get the job shows that the belief cannot be understood referentially, his ignorance of the coins in his pocket (...) shows that it cannot be understood attributively. An explanation for why Smith appeared to have justified true belief is given by distinguishing between 'belief' and 'belief in truth'. Smith believes the sentence 'the man who will get the job has ten coins in his pocket' to be true (he mistakenly believes that Jones will get the job, of whom he knows that he has ten coins in his pocket) (hence his 'belief'), the sentence is true (hence 'truth'), and he has sufficient reason to assent to it (hence his 'justification'). But he does not believe the proposition expressed. Hence he does not know it either. (shrink)

Where should experimental economics go next? This paper uses the literature on inequity aversion as a case study in suggesting that we could profit from tightening up our act.

Does economics hold the key to everything or does the recent financial crisis show that it has failed? This book provides an assessment of modern economics that cuts through the confusion and controversy on this question. Case studies of the creation of new markets, the Russian transition to capitalism, globalization, and money and finance establish that economics has been very successful where problems have been well defined and where the world can be changed to fit the theory, but that it (...) has been less successful in tackling bigger problems. The book then offers a historical perspective on how economists have, since the Second World War, tried to make their subject scientific. It explores the evolving relationship between science and ideology and investigates the place of heterodoxy and dissent within the discipline. (shrink)

The relationship between Friedrich Hayek and Michael Polanyi is documented and explored with respect to philosophy and economics. Their respective positions on epistemology and science are shown to fundamentally govern their differences with regard to the efficacy of government policy with regard to the economy.

The relationship between Friedrich Hayek and Michael Polanyi is documented and explored with respect to philosophy and economics. Their respective positions on epistemology and science are shown to fundamentally govern their differences with regard to the efficacy of government policy with regard to the economy.

We report general and consensus results of a survey administered to a defined population of economic science academics in Mexico. Our results include insights on economic opinions, scientific aspects of economics, scientific activities, countries' economic performances and methodological orientation. Our outcomes show areas of consensus which, at least partially, are consistent with findings in previous studies. Comparisons between our results and those of other studies suggest that consensus could be constant over time and that economics academics (...) in Mexico seems to show similar levels of skepticism about the importance of rationality assumption as those in other latitudes. (shrink)

ArgumentIn the decades following World War II, the Cowles Commission for Research in Economics came to represent new technical standards that informed most advances in economic theory. The public emergence of this community was manifest at a conference held in June 1949 titledActivity Analysis of Production and Allocation. New ideas in optimization theory, linked to linear programming, developed from the conference's papers. The authors’ history of this event situates the Cowles Commission among the institutions of postwar science in-between (...) National Laboratories and the supreme discipline of Cold War academia, mathematics. Although the conference created the conditions under which economics, as a discipline, would transform itself, the participants themselves had little concern for the intellectual battles that had defined prewar university economics departments. The authors argue that the conference signaled the birth of a new intellectual culture in economic science based on shared scientific norms and techniques un-interrogated by conflicting notions of the meaning of either science or economics. (shrink)

A review of Philip McShane's Pastkeynes Pastmodern Economics: A Fresh Pragmatism.

Two disputes have continually frustrated attempts to provide a tenable method of enquiry for economic science:(a) Should theory construction in economics include a commitment to moral principles? Or should economic theory remain value-free? (b) Does the peculiar subject matter of economics demand a teleological, or a mechanistic pattern of explanation? It is the aim of this paper to shed light on both the preceding controversies by seeking to clarify the relation between them. In particular, it is argued (...) via a case study of the theory of rational choice that over-simplified mechanistic constructions have distorted the normative content and applicability of economic theory. (shrink)

The '70s of the 19th century have always held a special attraction point for specialists in the history of thought. For economic theory, these are the years of the Great Crossroads when economic theory was at critical breaking point, after which several powerful theoretical streams emerged that were to determine later on the overall course of the evolution of economics. The book written by the French economist and philosopher Gilles Campagnolo is an attempt to find out exactly what (...) happened in the years of the Great Crossroads. It offers not only historical reading, but also theoretical interpretation to explaining the evolution, mutual influence and intermingling of the above individual schools of thought in the economic science. The present paper is a review essay on Campagnolo’s new book. (shrink)

: Eponymic honor is a common form of professional recognition in economics, as it is in other sciences. There also seems to be convincing evidence that individuals exposed to economic theory behave less cooperatively and more self-interestedly than individuals who have not been exposed to such economic ideas. Taken together these two facts would seem to suggest that the history of economic thought would be a history of rather contentious priority fights. If economists generally behave in self-interested (...) and non-cooperative ways, and having your name attached to a particular result serves one’s professional self-interest, then economists should be quick to fight for these eponymic honors. This means that economists should be continually involved in sordid disputes about who does, and who does not, get credit for various economic discoveries. The paradox is that such priority fights do not exist in economics. The paper examines absence of such disputes from a Mertonian perspective. (shrink)

This paper returns to a perennial controversy I examined in a previous paper in the Journal of Business Ethics (Vol. 2, 1983). Is economic theory an ethically neutral discipline or do its statements presuppose a commitment to moral values? Once again this issue is addressed via a case study of the neo-classical theory of rational choice. In the present paper I focus on behaviourist forms of operationalist attempts to short-circuit any argument that would seek to infer moral presuppositions from (...) the use of evaluative discourse. In particular, I examine strategies that have sought to excise from economic theory the mentalistic vocabulary required to describe valuations per se. And I argue that such tactics are deficient since they i) impoverish the explanatory power of economic theory, (ii) fail to recover the normative usefulness of the theory of choice, and (iii) camouflage the continued presupposition of moral commitments within neo-classical theory. (shrink)

The Greek myth of Narcissus, like any other moral tale, warns its readers against the dangers of self absorption. In their new edited volume, Craig Freedman and Rick Szostak gather together a collection of fables and tales to warn the economics profession against parallel pitfalls in their own activities. Academics in this field have all too often been seduced by the dazzling reflection produced by their own theoretical constructs. This collection is meant to serve as required bedside reading for all (...) economists, a serious if light-hearted look at the foibles currently plaguing the profession. Rather than committing the venial sin of didactic lecturing, the editors let economists speak for themselves in a series of reprinted articles. Intentionally or not, these articles illustrate the intractable blemishes currently disfiguring the face of economics. The reprints are by such noted economists as Blinder, Bronfenbrenner, Fair, Katzner, Learner, Leijonhufvud, and others. This thought-provoking range of ideas is further supplemented by the editors who tease out the underlying issues by means of their own original contributions. (shrink)

The article is an introduction to the use of the principle of falsification in economic science. It is shown what difficulties the named criterion of demarcation encounters when trying to introduce it into humanitarian knowledge. The specificity of economic knowledge itself, which makes it difficult to use the principle of falsification, is explicated.

The paper considers the conjecture that forecasts from preferred economic models or theories d-separate forecasts from less preferred models or theories from the Actual realization of the variable for which a scientific explanation is sought. D-separation provides a succinct notion to represent forecast dominance of one set of forecasts over another; it provides, as well, a criterion for model preference as a fundamental device for progress in economic science. We demonstrate these ideas with examples from three areas (...) of economic modeling. (shrink)

In this paper I argue that differences between the ‘new moral science’ of the seventeenth century and scholastic natural law theory originated primarily from the skeptical challenge the former had to face. Pufendorf’s project of a scientia practica universalis is the paramount expression of an anti-skeptical moral science, a ‘science’ that is both explanatory and normative, but also anti-dogmatic insofar as it tries to base its laws on those basic phenomena of human life which, supposedly, are immune (...) to skeptical doubt. The main scholastic legacy to the new moral science is the dichotomy between an ‘intellectualist’ and a ‘voluntarist’ view of natural law (or between lex immanens and lex imposita). Voluntarism lies at the basis of both theological views, such as Calvinism, and political views, such as those of Hobbes and Locke. The need to counterbalance the undesirable implications of extreme voluntarism may account for much of the developments in ethics and politics during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries.Scottish natural jurisprudence, which tried to find a middle way between skepticism and extreme voluntarism, is less secular and more empirical than received wisdom admits. There emerged, as one of its ‘accidental’ outcomes, a systematic, self-contained and empirical economic theory from the search for an empirically based normative theory of social life. The basic assumption of such a theory, namely, the notion of societal laws as embedded in trans-individual mechanisms, derives from the voluntarist view of natural law as ‘imposed’ law.Later discussions of social issues in terms of ‘economic’ and ‘ethical’ reasons originated partly from a misreading ofthe Scottish natural jurisprudential framework of economic theory. Starting with this reconstruction, I try to shed some light on recent discussions about the role of ethics in economics. (shrink)

We shall have to do a lot of thinking and a lot of educating before we can hope that our exchange processes will swing easily and gracefully from an expansion into a static phase instead of falling clumsily and painfully into a slump.

Self-Interest before Adam Smith inquires into the foundations of economic theory. It is generally assumed that the birth of modern economic science, marked by the publication of The Wealth of Nations in 1776, was the triumph of the 'selfish hypothesis'. Yet, as a neo-Epicurean idea, this hypothesis had been a matter of controversy for over a century and Smith opposed it from a neo-Stoic point of view. But how can the Epicurean principles of orthodox economic theory (...) be reconciled with the Stoic principles of Adam Smith's philosophy? Pierre Force shows how Smith's theory refutes the 'selfish hypothesis' and integrates it at the same time. He also explains how Smith appropriated Rousseau's 'republican' critique of modern commercial society, and makes the case that the autonomy of economic science is an unintended consequence of Smith's 'republican' principles. (shrink)

The Making of the Economy uses Husserl's critique of formalism in natural science in The Crisis of the European Sciences work as the template for an analogous critique of formalism in economic science. The historical narrative focuses on the emergence of formal economic analysis out of a series of successive life-worlds, or concrete historical situations. This generates new substantive understanding of both the historical material and the current discourse of crisis surrounding economics. It will appeal to (...) historians and philosophers of economics, as well as scholars of history, philosophy, and sociology. (shrink)

This paper is an attempt to illuminate today’s economic science with the light of Aristotle’s philosophy of economics. The author first describes Aristotle’s thoughts about the economy. Then, he distinguishes and discusses three Aristotelian principles: (a) economics should be a classical practical or moral science, (b) economics should not look for an unlimited wealth, but for the wealth necessary for the good life, and (c) economics should be aimed at the common good.

Today the economic diagram is employed universally in teaching and research by professional economists. Yet the history of its construction shows that much that has been regarded as distinctive of twentieth-century visual culture was prefigured in the nineteenth. This paper will place the construction of the first economic diagrams by Alfred Marshall in the context both of contemporary visual technologies developed in other moral sciences, and of his wider theory of industrial production. The paper will argue that an (...) understanding of the background to the historical graphs, constructed by the Cambridge political economist from the late 1860s onwards, will necessitate a revision of the narrative of modern visual reasoning, as recently advanced by Lev Manovich. (shrink)

The Nature and Method of Economic Sciences: Evidence, Causality, and Ends argues that economic phenomena can be examined from five analytical levels: namely, a statistical descriptive approach, a causal explanatory approach, a teleological explicative approach, a normative approach and, finally, the level of application. The above viewpoints are undertaken by different but related economic sciences, including statistics and economic history, positive economics, normative economics, and the 'art of political economy'. Typically, positive economics has analysed economic (...) phenomena using the second approach, causally explaining and often trying to predict the future evolution of the economy. It has not been concerned with the ends selected by the individual or society, taking them as given. However, various new economic currents have emerged during the last 40 years, and some of these do assign a fundamental role to ends within economics. This book argues that the field of positive economics should adapt to deal with the issues that arise from this. The text attempts to discern the nature of economic phenomena, introducing the different approaches and corresponding economic sciences. It goes on to analyse the epistemological characteristics of these in the subsequent chapters, as well as their disciplinary inter-relations. This book is a valuable resource for students and scholars of the social sciences, philosophy, and the philosophy of economics. It will also be of interest to those researching political economy, and the development of economic thought. (shrink)

The presented paper refers to values as the timeless foundations of modern economics, and also to ethical limitations in the sphere of economic research, especially in the mainstream. The character of the paper is a review. The aim of the research is an attempt to show the fundamental importance of values, often rooted in history, for the development of modern economics and to present a remedy for the current analytical problems of economic sciences – considering the importance of (...) axiology in economic research. The paper is divided into three main parts: introduction – theoretical considerations on the basis of the humanistic perspective of economics; first chapter – the place of values in philosophical and economic considerations, and second chapter – axiology as a complement to the gap in economic research. The authors proved that in the face of great crises, including the last one, which is the coronavirus crisis, there is an urgent need to extend economic analysis with values, which would make the science of economics more mature, perceiving an individual as an entity guided by a whole spectrum of principles. It is therefore necessary to go beyond the canon of rigid thinking, because otherwise we are threatened not only with the collapse of the economy, but the entire civilisation of the West. In this regard, let us provide a wider field for ethical analysis! (shrink)

Introduction -- The commercialisation of science and the construction of the knowledge-based bio-economy -- The KBBE reality--the case of agriculture -- Intellectual property rights and the global commodification of knowledge -- Privatizing Chinese science : national development vs. neoliberal financialization -- Critical realism and the importance of ontological attention -- Critical realism and beyond in economics -- The realist transcendental argument.

In Bettering Humanomics: A New and Old Approach to Economic Science, Deirdre Nansen McCloskey offers a critique of contemporary economics and a proposal for a better humanomics. McCloskey argues for an economic science that accepts the models and mathematics, the statistics and experiments of the current orthodoxy, but also attests to the immense amount we can still learn about human nature and the economy. From observing human actions in social contexts, to the various understandings attained by (...) studying history, philosophy, and literature, McCloskey presents the myriad ways in which we think about life and how we justify and understand our actions in a synergistically human approach towards economic theory and practice. (shrink)