Economic crisis, economic methodology and the scientific ideal of physics

The methodological foundations of mainstream economics have been cited as one of the main reasons for its failure to account for the economic crisis of 2008. In spite of this, the status of economic methodology has not been elevated. This is due to the persistent aversion towards methodological disc...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal:	Stavros A. Drakopoulos
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	DE EN FR
Publicado:	Editura ASE Bucuresti 2016
Materias:	economic methodology history of economic thought economic crisis Economics as a science HB71-74
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/652e750f7c794c5fb7ea99405630c10f
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:652e750f7c794c5fb7ea99405630c10f
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:652e750f7c794c5fb7ea99405630c10f2021-12-02T03:04:38ZEconomic crisis, economic methodology and the scientific ideal of physics1843-22981844-8208https://doaj.org/article/652e750f7c794c5fb7ea99405630c10f2016-11-01T00:00:00Z https://jpe.ro/pdf.php?id=7691 https://doaj.org/toc/1843-2298https://doaj.org/toc/1844-8208The methodological foundations of mainstream economics have been cited as one of the main reasons for its failure to account for the economic crisis of 2008. In spite of this, the status of economic methodology has not been elevated. This is due to the persistent aversion towards methodological discourse by most mainstream economists. The anti-methodology stance has a long presence as exemplified in Frank Hahn’s (1992) work. After focusing on the debate originating after the publication of Hahn’s arguments, the paper offers a categorization of the main explanations for mainstream methodological aversion. Subsequently, it suggests an explanation based on the role of the physics scientific ideal, arguing that the endeavor to achieve the high scientific status of physics by following the methods of physics, contributed to the negative mainstream attitude towards economic methodology. The relevant writings of the extremely influential mainstream economists Irving Fisher and Milton Friedman, reinforce the assertion that the alleged hard science status of economics renders methodological discussions and especially methodological criticism, rather pointless. The paper also calls for a more systematic discussion of this issue, especially in the wake of the line of argument that links the recent failings of mainstream economics to its methodological basisStavros A. DrakopoulosEditura ASE Bucurestiarticleeconomic methodologyhistory of economic thoughteconomic crisisEconomics as a scienceHB71-74DEENFRJournal of Philosophical Economics, Vol X, Iss 1, Pp 28-57 (2016)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	DE EN FR
topic	economic methodology history of economic thought economic crisis Economics as a science HB71-74
spellingShingle	economic methodology history of economic thought economic crisis Economics as a science HB71-74 Stavros A. Drakopoulos Economic crisis, economic methodology and the scientific ideal of physics
description	The methodological foundations of mainstream economics have been cited as one of the main reasons for its failure to account for the economic crisis of 2008. In spite of this, the status of economic methodology has not been elevated. This is due to the persistent aversion towards methodological discourse by most mainstream economists. The anti-methodology stance has a long presence as exemplified in Frank Hahn’s (1992) work. After focusing on the debate originating after the publication of Hahn’s arguments, the paper offers a categorization of the main explanations for mainstream methodological aversion. Subsequently, it suggests an explanation based on the role of the physics scientific ideal, arguing that the endeavor to achieve the high scientific status of physics by following the methods of physics, contributed to the negative mainstream attitude towards economic methodology. The relevant writings of the extremely influential mainstream economists Irving Fisher and Milton Friedman, reinforce the assertion that the alleged hard science status of economics renders methodological discussions and especially methodological criticism, rather pointless. The paper also calls for a more systematic discussion of this issue, especially in the wake of the line of argument that links the recent failings of mainstream economics to its methodological basis
format	article
author	Stavros A. Drakopoulos
author_facet	Stavros A. Drakopoulos
author_sort	Stavros A. Drakopoulos
title	Economic crisis, economic methodology and the scientific ideal of physics
title_short	Economic crisis, economic methodology and the scientific ideal of physics
title_full	Economic crisis, economic methodology and the scientific ideal of physics
title_fullStr	Economic crisis, economic methodology and the scientific ideal of physics
title_full_unstemmed	Economic crisis, economic methodology and the scientific ideal of physics
title_sort	economic crisis, economic methodology and the scientific ideal of physics
publisher	Editura ASE Bucuresti
publishDate	2016
url	https://doaj.org/article/652e750f7c794c5fb7ea99405630c10f
work_keys_str_mv	AT stavrosadrakopoulos economiccrisiseconomicmethodologyandthescientificidealofphysics
_version_	1718401988026171392

Economic crisis, economic methodology and the scientific ideal of physics

Ejemplares similares