Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-vdxz6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T05:17:27.171Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Problems with Realism in Economics

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 December 2008

Daniel M. Hausman
Daniel M. Hausman
Affiliation:
London School of Economics and University of Wisconsin–Madison
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

This essay attempts to distinguish the pressing issues for economists and economic methodologists concerning realism in economics from those issues that are of comparatively slight importance. In particular I shall argue that issues concerning the goals of science are of considerable interest in economics, unlike issues concerning the evidence for claims about unobservables, which have comparatively little relevance. In making this argument, this essay raises doubts about the two programs in contemporary economic methodology that raise the banner of realism. In particular I argue that the banner makes it more difficult to relate the concerns of those who wave it (Tony Lawson and Uskali Mäki) to those of other methodologists. Although this essay argues that many of the debates in this century between scientific realists and their opponents are not relevant to economics, it does not attack scientific realism, and it does not urge economists or economic methodologists to reject it.

Type
Essays
Information
Economics & Philosophy , Volume 14 , Issue 2 , October 1998 , pp. 185 - 213
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1998

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Becker, Gary. 1976. The Economic Approach to Human Behavior. University of Chicago PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bhaskar, Roy. 1978. A Realist Theory of Science. Harvester PressGoogle Scholar
Bhaskar, Roy. 1979. The Possibility of Naturalism. Harvester PressGoogle Scholar
Boland, L. 1979. ‘A critique of Friedman's critics’. Journal of Economic Literature, 17:503–22Google Scholar
Boyd, Richard. 1983. ‘On the current status of scientific realism’. Erkenntnis, 19:45–90. Reprinted in Richard Boyd, Philip Gasper, and J. D. Trout (eds.). The Philosophy of Science. MIT Press, 1991CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boylan, Thomas and O'Gorman, Paschal. 1995. Beyond Rhetoric and Realism in Economics: Towards a Reformulation of Economic Methodology. RoutledgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carnap, Rudolf. 1939. Foundations of Logic and Mathematics. International Encyclopedia of Unified Science, Vol. 1, No. 3. University of Chicago PressGoogle Scholar
Churchland, Paul and Hooker, Clifford (eds.). 1985. Images of Science: Essays on Realism and Empiricism. University of Chicago PressGoogle Scholar
Devitt, Michael. 1984. Realism and Truth. Princeton University PressGoogle Scholar
Duhem, P. [1906] 1954. The Aim and Structure of Scientific Theories. Trans. Wiener, P.. Princeton University PressGoogle Scholar
Frank, Philipp. 1988. The Law of Causality and its Limits. Cohen, Robert (ed.). Trans. Marie Neurath and Robert Cohen. KluwerGoogle Scholar
Friedman, Milton. 1953. ‘The methodology of positive economies’. In Essays in Positive Economics, pp. 3–43. University of Chicago PressGoogle Scholar
Hausman, Daniel. 1992a. The Inexact and Separate Science of Economics. Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hausman, Daniel. 1992b. ‘Why look under the hood’? In Essays on Philosophy and Economic Methodology, pp. 70–3. Cambridge University Press. Reprinted in The Philosophy of Economics, 2nd edn., pp. 217–21. Daniel Hausman (ed.). Cambridge University Press, 1994CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hausman, Daniel. 1998. ‘Explanation and diagnosis in economies’. Revue Internationale de PhilosophieGoogle Scholar
Kaplan, Mark. 1996. Decision Theory as Philosophy. Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lancaster, Kelvin. 1966. ‘A new approach to consumer theory’. Journal of Political Economy, 74:132–57CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lawson, Tony. 1997. Economics and Reality. RoutledgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leplin, Jarrett. (ed.). 1984. Scientific Realism. University of California PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lester, Richard. 1946. ‘Shortcomings of marginal analysis for wage-employment problems’. American Economic Review, 36:62–82Google Scholar
Machlup, Fritz. 1955. ‘The problem of verification in economies’. Southern Economic Journal, 22:1–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Machlup, Fritz. 1956. ‘Rejoinder to a reluctant ultra-empiricist’. Southern Economic Journal, 22:483–93; Reprinted as ‘On indirect verification’ in The Philosophy of Economics: An Anthology. 2nd edn., pp. 168–79. Daniel Hausman (ed.). Cambridge University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Machlup, Fritz. 1960. ‘Operational concepts and mental constructs in model and theory formation’. Giornale Degli Economisti, 19:553–82Google Scholar
Machlup, Fritz. 1964. ‘Professor Samuelson on theory and realism’. American Economic Review, 54:733–6Google Scholar
Mäki, Uskali. 1990. ‘Mengerian economics in realist perspective’. In Carl Menger and His Legacy in Economics. Caldwell, Bruce (ed.). History of Political Economy, Supplement, 22:289–310Google Scholar
Mäki, Uskali. 1992. ‘The market as an isolated causal process: a metaphysical ground for realism’. In Austrian Economics: Tensions and New Directions, pp. 35–59. Caldwell, Bruce and Boehm, Stephan (eds.). KluwerCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mäki, Uskali. 1996a. ‘Scientific realism and some peculiarities of economies’. In Realism and Anti-Realism in the Philosophy of Science, pp. 427–47. Cohen, R. S., Hilpinen, R. and Renzong, Qiu (eds.). KluwerCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mäki, Uskali. 1996b. ‘Two portraits of economies’. Journal of Economic Methodology, 3:1–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mäki, Uskali. 1998. ‘Realism’. In The Handbook of Economic Methodology, pp. 404–9. Davis, John, Hands, D. Wade, and Maki, Uskali (eds.). Edward ElgarGoogle Scholar
Mongin, Philippe. 1988. ‘Le réalism des hypothèses et la partial interpretation view’. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 18:281–325CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morgenbesser, Sidney. 1960. ‘The realist-instrumentalist controversy’. In Philosophy, Science, and Method, pp. 106–22. Morgenbesser, Sidney, Suppes, Patrick, and White, Morton (eds.). Harcourt, Brace & WorldGoogle Scholar
Nagel, Ernest. 1959. The Structure of Science. Harcourt, Brace & WorldGoogle Scholar
Putnam, Hilary. 1975–1976. ‘What is realism?’ Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 76:177–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenberg, Alexander. 1976. Microeconomic Laws: A Philosophical Analysis. University of Pittsburgh PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Samuelson, Paul. 1963. ‘Problems of methodology-discussion’. American Economic Review Papers and Proceedings, 53:232–6Google Scholar
Shapere, Dudley. 1982. ‘The concept of observation in science and philosophy’. Philosophy of Science, 49:485–525CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Fraassen, B. 1980. The Scientific Image. Oxford University PressCrossRefGoogle Scholar