Are rival theories of smoking underdetermined?
Robert Goldfarb (),
Thomas Leonard () and
Steven Suranovic ()
Journal of Economic Methodology, 2001, vol. 8, issue 2, 229-251
Some empirically minded philosophers of science argue that the evidence should choose the best theory from among theoretical rivals. However, the evidence may not speak clearly, a problem of 'underdetermination of theory by data'. We examine this problem in a concrete setting, rival theories of smoking behaviour. We investigate whether several uncontested pieces of empirical evidence allow us to choose between two competing theoretical perspectives on smoking, rational choice and non-rational choice, respectively. Next, we develop a more refined taxonomy of smoking theories, and consider the consequences for theory testing. Finally, we examine some normative aspects of theory choice involving the appropriate scope of government action.
Keywords: Underdetermination Of Theory By Data; Empirical Testing; Theory Choice; Rational Choice Theory; Smoking; Paternalism (search for similar items in EconPapers)
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (2) Track citations by RSS feed
Downloads: (external link)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:taf:jecmet:v:8:y:2001:i:2:p:229-251
Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
Access Statistics for this article
Journal of Economic Methodology is currently edited by John Davis and D Wade Hands
More articles in Journal of Economic Methodology from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Longhurst ().