Economic crisis, economic methodology and the scientific ideal of physics

Stavros Drakopoulos

The Journal of Philosophical Economics, 2016, vol. 10, issue 1, 28-57

Abstract: 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

Keywords: economic methodology; history of economic thought; economic crisis (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: B41 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2016
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (3)

Downloads: (external link)
https://jpe.ro/pdf.php?id=7691 (application/pdf)
https://jpe.ro/?id=revista&p=440 (text/html)

Related works:
Working Paper: Economic Crisis, Economic Methodology and the Scientific Ideal of Physics (2016)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:bus:jphile:v:10:y:2016:i:1:n:2

Access Statistics for this article

The Journal of Philosophical Economics is currently edited by Valentin Cojanu

More articles in The Journal of Philosophical Economics from Bucharest Academy of Economic Studies, The Journal of Philosophical Economics Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Valentin Cojanu ().