Economists' Odd Stand on the Positive-Normative Distinction: A Behavioral Economics View

John Davis

No 2013-02, Working Papers and Research from Marquette University, Center for Global and Economic Studies and Department of Economics

Abstract: This chapter examines economists' indefensible attachment to the positive-normative distinction, and suggests a behavioral economics explanation of their behavior on the subject. It reviews the origins of the distinction in Hume's guillotine and logical positivism, and shows how they form the basis for Robbins' understanding of value neutrality. It connects philosophers' rejection of logical positivism to their rejection of the positive-normative distinction, explains and modifies Putnam's view of fact-value entanglement, and identifies four main ethical value judgments that contemporary economists employ. The behavioral explanation of economists' denial of these value judgments emphasizes loss aversion and economists' social identity as economists.

Keywords: value neutrality; Robbins; Putnam; fact-value entanglement; loss aversion (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2013-03
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (2)

Downloads: (external link)
http://epublications.marquette.edu/econ_workingpapers/24 (application/pdf)

Related works:
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:mrq:wpaper:2013-02

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Working Papers and Research from Marquette University, Center for Global and Economic Studies and Department of Economics Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Andrew G. Meyer ().