IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/jecmet/v9y2001i2p141-168.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Reflection on rules in science: an invisible-hand perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Thomas Leonard

Abstract

Can successful science accommodate a realistic view of scientific motivation? The Received View in theory of science has a theory of scientific success but no theory of scientific motivation. Critical Science Studies has a theory of scientific motivation but denies any prospect for (epistemologically meaningful) scientific success. Neither can answer the question because both regard the question as immaterial. Arguing from the premise that an adequate theory of science needs both a theory of scientific motivation, and a theory of scientific success, I make a case for seeing science as a kind of invisible-hand process. After distinguishing different and often confused conceptions of invisible-hand processes, I focus on scientific rules, treated as emergent responses to various coordination failures in the production and distribution of reliable knowledge. Scientific rules, and the means for their enforcement, constitute the invisible-hand mechanism, so that scientific rules (sometimes) induce interested scientific actors with worldly goals to make epistemically good choices.

Suggested Citation

  • Thomas Leonard, 2001. "Reflection on rules in science: an invisible-hand perspective," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(2), pages 141-168.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:jecmet:v:9:y:2001:i:2:p:141-168
    DOI: 10.1080/13501780210137092
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/13501780210137092
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/13501780210137092?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. John B. Davis & D. W. Hands & Uskali Mäki (ed.), 1998. "The Handbook of Economic Methodology," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 741.
    2. Kenneth Arrow, 1962. "Economic Welfare and the Allocation of Resources for Invention," NBER Chapters, in: The Rate and Direction of Inventive Activity: Economic and Social Factors, pages 609-626, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Thomas C. Leonard, 2000. "The Very Idea of Applying Economics: The Modern Minimum-Wage Controversy and Its Antecedents," History of Political Economy, Duke University Press, vol. 32(5), pages 117-144, Supplemen.
    4. Roger E. Backhouse, 1997. "Truth and Progress in Economic Knowledge," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 766.
    5. Hands,D. Wade, 2001. "Reflection without Rules," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521797962.
    6. Wible James, 1998. "The Economics Of Science, Methodology And Epistemology As If Economics Really Matter," Journal des Economistes et des Etudes Humaines, De Gruyter, vol. 8(4), pages 1-18, December.
    7. David Neumark & William Wascher, 1995. "The Effect of New Jersey's Minimum Wage Increase on Fast-Food Employment: A Re-Evaluation Using Payroll Records," NBER Working Papers 5224, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    8. Partha Dasgupta & Paul A. David, 1987. "Information Disclosure and the Economics of Science and Technology," Palgrave Macmillan Books, in: George R. Feiwel (ed.), Arrow and the Ascent of Modern Economic Theory, chapter 16, pages 519-542, Palgrave Macmillan.
    9. Mirowski, Philip & Sent, Esther-Mirjam (ed.), 2002. "Science Bought and Sold," University of Chicago Press Economics Books, University of Chicago Press, edition 1, number 9780226538563, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Viktor Vanberg, 2010. "The ‘science-as-market’ analogy: a constitutional economics perspective," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 28-49, March.
    2. Roger Koppl, 2011. "Against representative agent methodology," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 24(1), pages 43-55, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Andrea Salanti, 2013. "Between the Scylla of Whig history and the Charybdis of methodological vacuum," Chapters, in: Marcel Boumans & Matthias Klaes (ed.), Mark Blaug: Rebel with Many Causes, chapter 14, pages 191-207, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    2. Boldyrev, I., 2011. "Economic Methodology Today: a Review of Major Contributions," Journal of the New Economic Association, New Economic Association, issue 9, pages 47-70.
    3. Paula E. Stephan, 2004. "Robert K. Merton's perspective on priority and the provision of the public good knowledge," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 60(1), pages 81-87, May.
    4. Carayol, Nicolas & Dalle, Jean-Michel, 2007. "Sequential problem choice and the reward system in Open Science," Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 167-191, June.
    5. Paul A. David, 2005. "The Economic Logic of “Open Science” and the Balance between Private Property Rights and the Public Domain in Scientific Data and," Development and Comp Systems 0502006, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Paul David, 2001. "From Keeping Natures Secrets to the Institutionalization of Open Science," Oxford Economic and Social History Working Papers _023, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    7. Bergemann, Dirk & Ottaviani, Marco, 2021. "Information Markets and Nonmarkets," CEPR Discussion Papers 16459, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    8. Vladiir Yefimov, 2015. "Two Disputes Of Methods, Three Constructivisms, And Three Liberalisms. Part I," Economy of region, Centre for Economic Security, Institute of Economics of Ural Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences, vol. 1(1), pages 29-38.
    9. Sulin Ba & Jan Stallaert & Andrew B. Whinston, 2001. "Optimal Investment in Knowledge Within a Firm Using a Market Mechanism," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 47(9), pages 1203-1219, September.
    10. Yefimov, V. M., 2015. "Two Disputes of Methods Three Constructivisms and Three Liberalisms. Part I," R-Economy, Ural Federal University, Graduate School of Economics and Management, vol. 1(1), pages 24-33.
    11. Francesco Guala & Andrea Salanti, 2002. "Model-robustness in ‘old’ and ‘new’ growth theory," Working Papers (-2012) 0201, University of Bergamo, Department of Economics.
    12. Francesco Guala & Andrea Salanti, 2002. "On the Robustness of Economic Models," Working Papers (-2012) 0208, University of Bergamo, Department of Economics.
    13. Marcel Boumans & Mary Morgan, 2002. "Ceteris paribus conditions: materiality and the application of economic theories," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(1), pages 11-26.
    14. Maria Rosaria Carillo & Erasmo Papagni, 2004. "Academic Research, Social Interactions And Economic Growth," Working Papers 10_2004, D.E.S. (Department of Economic Studies), University of Naples "Parthenope", Italy.
    15. Christian Soltmann & Tobias Stucki & Martin Woerter, 2013. "The Performance Effect of Environmental Innovations," KOF Working papers 13-330, KOF Swiss Economic Institute, ETH Zurich.
    16. Antonelli, Cristiano, 2004. "To Use or To Sell Technological Knowledge," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis LEI & BRICK - Laboratory of Economics of Innovation "Franco Momigliano", Bureau of Research in Innovation, Complexity and Knowledge, Collegio 200405, University of Turin.
    17. Antonelli, Cristiano, 2006. "The Economics of University: a Knowledge Governance Approach," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis LEI & BRICK - Laboratory of Economics of Innovation "Franco Momigliano", Bureau of Research in Innovation, Complexity and Knowledge, Collegio 200602, University of Turin.
    18. Cristiano Antonelli, 2004. "The Governance of Localized Technological Knowledge and the Evolution of Intellectual Property Rights," Chapters, in: Enrico Colombatto (ed.), The Elgar Companion to the Economics of Property Rights, chapter 19, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    19. Gérard Charreaux, 2008. "La recherche en finance d’entreprise:quel positionnement méthodologique ?," Revue Finance Contrôle Stratégie, revues.org, vol. 11(Special), pages 237-290, June.
    20. Iain M. Cockburn & Rebecca M. Henderson, 2001. "Publicly Funded Science and the Productivity of the Pharmaceutical Industry," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation Policy and the Economy, Volume 1, pages 1-34, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:jecmet:v:9:y:2001:i:2:p:141-168. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RJEC20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.