Battle of methods between the Austrian school of economics and the German historical school as the most important methodological dispute in history of economics
AbstractThe presented article is concerned with the Methodenstreit between the Austrian School of Economics and the German Historical School in 19th century. The Methodenstreit between the Austrians and Germans is considered the most important methodological dispute in economics. Three main topics of the argument are distinguished: a) dispute concerning a role of induction and deduction in economics, b) dispute about exact or empirical laws in economics and c) dispute about application of methodological individualism or methodological collectivism in economics and other social sciences. The solution of above-mentioned problems is presented by three participants of the Methodenstreit: a) by the most significance representative of the older German Historical School - Wilhelm Roscher, b) by the founder of Austrian School of Economics - Carl Menger and c) by the leader of the younger German Historical School - Gustav Schmoller. The point of departure of this article is methodological pluralism.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by University of Economics, Prague in its journal Politická ekonomie.
Volume (Year): 1999 (1999)
Issue (Month): 4 ()
Postal: Redakce Politické ekonomie, Vysoká škola ekonomická, nám. W. Churchilla 4, 130 67 Praha 3
You can help add them by filling out this form.
reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.Access and download statisticsgeneral information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Vaclav Subrta).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.