Economic Methodology

Post Keynezyen İktisadı Birey ve Post Keynezyen İktisat Metodolojisinde Krizlerin Dinamikleri Üzerine Yazınsal Bir İnceleme:1929 ve 2008 Krizi Karşılaştırması

by Ömer Tuğsal Doruk

Politik İktisat,Kriz ve Kalkınma Ed.Şiriner,Morady,Mika,Aydın,Koç;Kapucu ve Doğan.2011.IJOPEC Pub.,İstanbul& Londra

Revisiting the ‘Natural’ Origins of Economics

by Alex M Thomas

Mainstream Economics: Searching Where the Light Is

by Rogier De Langhe

published in Journal of Post-Keynesian Economics

The starting point of this paper is the question how to explain mainstream economics’ great level of acceptance in the... more The starting point of this paper is the question how to explain mainstream economics’ great level of acceptance in the face of its poor empirical track record. An explanation is provided in terms of a combination of unification and, most importantly,
inference to the best explanation. This paper asks whether the appeal of mainstream economics to inference to the best explanation is justified and as a consequence questions one
of the main reasons for the dominance of mainstream economics today. The final section integrates the ideas from the previous sections into a general framework for explanatory
pluralism.

The Neglect of Comparison Income: an Historical Perspective

by Stavros Drakopoulos

published in the European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, vol.18, No3, 2011

Theories of social comparison have a long presence in the social sciences and have provided many useful insights. In... more Theories of social comparison have a long presence in the social sciences and have provided many useful insights. In economics, the idea of comparison, aspiration or relative income belongs to this theoretical framework. The first systematic usages of this notion can be found in the works of Keynes and Duesenberry. After these works the concept was relatively ignored by orthodox theorists until its recent re-appearance, mainly in the fields of labour and macroeconomics. To the contrary, however, income comparisons continued to play a role in much of Keynesian inspired and non-mainstream economics literature. In the past few years it has made a strong comeback in the literature of job satisfaction and of the economics of happiness. This paper attempts to trace the development of the concept in the modern history of economic thought. It also discusses the main theoretical implications of adopting income comparisons and possible reasons for its relative disregard by orthodox economics.

WICKSTEED, ROBBINS AND THE EMERGENCE OF MAINSTREAM ECONOMIC METHODOLOGY

by Stavros Drakopoulos

Published in Review of Political Economy, vol.23, 2011

Phillip Wicksteed's ideas played an important role in the history of economic methodology, first, because his views... more Phillip Wicksteed's ideas played an important role in the history of economic methodology, first, because his views represent the starting point of the deliberate attempt to expel hedonism from marginalist economic analysis, and secondly because his ideas influenced his prominent disciple Lionel Robbins. The current mainstream view of an allegedly value-free economic science can be traced to Robbins. The paper examines Wicksteed's conception of economic science and the role of hedonism. His views on the nature and the role of economic man, and his analysis of egoism and of altruistic behaviour are also discussed. The paper assesses Wicksteed's influence, via Robbins, on the formation of mainstream methodological views.

A Review of Kuhnian and Lakatosian “Explanations” in Economics.

by Stavros Drakopoulos

published in History of Economic Ideas, vol. 13, 2005
Co-author: A. D. Karayiannis

In the last few decades the influence on economics of the ideas of T. Kuhn and I. Lakatos was considerable. The... more In the last few decades the influence on economics of the ideas of T. Kuhn and I. Lakatos was considerable. The increasing use of terms like “paradigms” and “scientific research programmes” in almost every field of economics, is indicative of the influence of these two philosophers. Furthermore, the introduction of the ideas of Kuhn and Lakatos in economics gave the stimulus for work on the nature of growth of economic knowledge. The paper starts by presenting the main influence of T. Kuhn on theories concerned with the evolution of economic theory. It continues with a review of the main criticisms regarding the appropriateness and applicability of Kuhnian ideas for economics. The same approach is followed in the case of I. Lakatos. After a classification and discussion of the main findings, the paper attempts to offer an interpretation of the general impact of these two philosophers science on ideas relating to the development of economic theories.

A Meta-theoretical Assessment of the Decline of Scholastic Economics

by Stavros Drakopoulos

Published in History of Economics Review, vol. 40, 2004
Co-author G. Gotsis

The aim of this paper is to offer certain insights into the process of declining of scholastic economics in late... more The aim of this paper is to offer certain insights into the process of declining of scholastic economics in late medieval and early modern European intellectual circles. In this attempt, the paper adopts the metatheoretical framework of Laudan’s philosophy of science and introduces the concept of scientific research tradition in pre-classical economic thought. It then considers the features of scholastic research tradition, specifies its empirical and conceptual problems and indicates a general scenario of assessing its performance over time. Of primary importance, in this respect, becomes the issue of evaluating the external and internal factors of disintegrating of the scholastic tradition, whose constraints reflect its incorporation into a broader ethical analysis and necessitate its transformation into a more secular approach to economic phenomena.

The concept of orders of instruments and goods in Rae and Menger

by Stavros Drakopoulos

Published in John Rae: The Economist, O. Hamouda, C. Lee and D. Mair (eds.), Routledge, London, 1998

Origins and development of the trend toward value-free economics

by Stavros Drakopoulos

Published in Journal of the History of Economic Thought, vol19, 1997

The vast majority of pre-Classical and of many Classical economists thought that it was natural to incorporate value... more The vast majority of pre-Classical and of many Classical economists thought that it was natural to incorporate value judgments and norms in their economic reasoning. However, there was a gradual dominance of the idea of a neutral or value-free economic science which gained momentum with the second Marginalist generation. More specifically, clear signs of this tendency can be found in the works of Sidgwick, Pareto and Fisher. The paper examines the process of this change and provides possible justifications. In particular, the work discusses this trend with reference to the growing influence of classical physics, and positivist philosophies of science. Consequently, the paper shows that there was a gradual broadening of the meaning of the term “value judgments” to include mental states and motivations. These developments are essential in the understanding of the formation of the standard economic theory and especially of microeconomic theory.

Causality and Determinism in Economics

by Stavros Drakopoulos

Co-authored with T. Torrance.
Published in Scottish Journal of Poltical Economy, vol.41, No.2, 1994

A great deal of recent methodological discussion in economics and econometrics has been dominated by the question of... more A great deal of recent methodological discussion in economics and econometrics has been dominated by the question of the appropriate role of the concepts of causality and determinism. This paper traces the evolution of these two notions in recent economics literature, and seeks to appraise the current range of professional opinion. Positively, the paper argues that since developments in twentieth-century microphysics have largely discredited the old deterministic paradigm within the physical sciences, the persistence of this paradigm in the social sciences must be viewed as scientifically untenable. Within economics, causality should be understood in the context of open systems and of inherently probabilistic explanations

Values and economic theory

by Stavros Drakopoulos

Book. Aldershot: Gower, 1991

Demonstrates that the hedonistic approach has played a central role in the development of orthodox economic theory.... more Demonstrates that the hedonistic approach has played a central role in the development of orthodox economic theory. Discusses the meaning of hedonism and its origins in ancient Greek thought; the reappearance of hedonism and its introduction to economics; the hedonistic influence on marginalism; the attempt to downplay hedonism in economics; the theory of choice; the current state of microeconomic theory; nonhedonistic economic approaches; and the issue of value systems in orthodox economics.

Behavioral Economics

by Erik Angner

Angner, Erik and George Loewenstein (in press, 2012) "Behavioral Economics," in Uskali Mäki (Ed.) Handbook of the Philosophy of Science: Philosophy of Economics (Amsterdam: Elsevier), pp. 641-690.

Behavioral economics is the effort to increase the explanatory and predictive power of economic theory by providing it... more Behavioral economics is the effort to increase the explanatory and predictive power of economic theory by providing it with more psychologically plausible foundations. Behavioral economics, which recently emerged as a bona fide subdiscipline of economics, raises a number of questions of a philosophical, methodological, and historical nature. This chapter offers a survey of behavioral economics, including its historical origins, results, and methods; its relationship to neighboring fields; and its philosophical and methodological underpinnings. Our central thesis is that the development of behavioral economics in important respects parallels the development of cognitive science. Both fields are based on a repudiation of the positivist methodological strictures that were in place at their founding and a belief in the legitimacy of making reference to unobservable entities such as beliefs, emotions, and heuristics. And both fields adopt an interdisciplinary approach, admitting evidence of many kinds and using a variety of methods to generate such evidence. Moreover, there are in fact more direct links between the two fields. The single most important source of inspiration for behavioral economists has been behavioral decision research, which can in turn be seen as an integration of ideas from cognitive science and economics. Exploring the parallels between the two endeavors, we attempt to show, can shed light on the historical origins of, and the specific form taken by, behavioral economics.

"Theory” and “Models”: Terminology Through the Looking Glass

by Jonathan Ratner

Published in Econ Journal Watch (January 2008).

Klein and Romero’s (2007, Econ Journal Watch) use of the terms “theory” and “model” seems at considerable variance... more Klein and Romero’s (2007, Econ Journal Watch) use of the terms “theory” and “model” seems at considerable variance from other common uses, suggesting that divergent usage by economist-authors may confront readers with substantial ambiguity. Clarity and understanding can be enhanced by sorting out the competing uses of these terms. This paper first sets forth and examines Klein-Romero’s use of “theory” and “model”. Second, it compares their usage with several quite different if not antithetical examples in the literature. Third, it provides a tentative classification scheme of model-types to capture the range of usages of this term in economics. Our thesis is that the terms “theory” and “model” are incapable of carrying the diverse characteristics different economists ascribe to them. Descriptive clarity may require more than just two terms. Our classificatory scheme tries to shed light on this possibility, at least for models.

Reviews of books-Critical Economic Methodology: A Personal Odyssey

by Ross Emmett

Political Economy vs ‘New’ Political Economy

by Alex M Thomas

Published as ‘Is the ‘New’ Political Economy all it is cracked up to be’ in Conspicuous Consumption: The University of Sydney Journal of Political Economy, Issue 2, 2011

Reasonable Homunculi Can Disagree: The Impossibility of Welfare Economics

by Brad Taylor

This paper draws on the “preference reversal” literature in psychology and behavioural economics to argue for the... more This paper draws on the “preference reversal” literature in psychology and behavioural economics to argue for the impossibility of welfare economics. The effect of normatively-irrelevant contextual factors shows that humans do not have a coherent preference function which pre-exists and informs choice. Every choice is a constructive act which forces us to choose among incommensurable values: choice creates preference. This rules out the possibility of a value-free welfare economics and forces social scientists wishing to make normative conclusions to engage in indeterminate moral reasoning.

The economic entomologist: an interview with Alan Kirman

by Erasmus Journal for Philosophy and Economics (EJPE)

Pre-published contribution.
Forthcoming in EJPE volume 4, issue 2, 2011.

"Theory” and “Models”: Terminology Through the Looking Glass

by Jonathan Ratner

Published in Econ Journal Watch (January 2008).

Klein and Romero’s (2007, Econ Journal Watch) use of the terms “theory” and “model” seems at considerable variance... more Klein and Romero’s (2007, Econ Journal Watch) use of the terms “theory” and “model” seems at considerable variance from other common uses, suggesting that divergent usage by economist-authors may confront readers with substantial ambiguity. Clarity and understanding can be enhanced by sorting out the competing uses of these terms. This paper first sets forth and examines Klein-Romero’s use of “theory” and “model”. Second, it compares their usage with several quite different if not antithetical examples in the literature. Third, it provides a tentative classification scheme of model-types to capture the range of usages of this term in economics. Our thesis is that the terms “theory” and “model” are incapable of carrying the diverse characteristics different economists ascribe to them. Descriptive clarity may require more than just two terms. Our classificatory scheme tries to shed light on this possibility, at least for models.

Exploring different visions of the model-empirics nexus: Solow versus Lipsey

by Jonathan Ratner

Gender, Rhetoric and Economic Theory

by Karey Harrison

Co-authored with Diana Strassmann, ‘Gender, rhetoric and economic knowledge’, Southern Economics Association Meeting, Florida, USA 1989