IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/6067.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Did F. A. Hayek Embrace Popperian Falsificationism? A Critical Comment About Certain Theses of Popper, Duhem and Austrian Methodology

Author

Listed:
  • van den Hauwe, Ludwig

Abstract

Hayek´s methodological outlook at the time he engaged in business cycle research was actually closer to praxeological apriorism than to Popperian falsificationism. A consideration of the Duhem thesis highlights the fact that even from a mainstream methodological perspective falsificationism is more problematic than is often realized. Even if the praxeological and mainstream lines of argumentation reject the Popperian emphasis on falsification for different reasons and from a different background, the prospects for falsificationism in economic methodology seem rather bleak.

Suggested Citation

  • van den Hauwe, Ludwig, 2007. "Did F. A. Hayek Embrace Popperian Falsificationism? A Critical Comment About Certain Theses of Popper, Duhem and Austrian Methodology," MPRA Paper 6067, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:6067
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/6067/1/MPRA_paper_6067.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    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. Cross, Rodney, 1982. "The Duhem-Quine Thesis, Lakatos and the Appraisal of Theories in Macroeconomics," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 92(366), pages 320-340, June.
    3. Summers, Lawrence H, 1991. " The Scientific Illusion in Empirical Macroeconomics," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 93(2), pages 129-148.
    4. Keuzenkamp, Hugo A. & Magnus, Jan R., 1995. "On tests and significance in econometrics," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 67(1), pages 5-24, May.
    5. Hausman,Daniel M., 1992. "The Inexact and Separate Science of Economics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521425230, December.
    6. de Soto Jesus Huerta, 1998. "The Ongoing Methodenstreit of The Austrian School," Journal des Economistes et des Etudes Humaines, De Gruyter, vol. 8(1), pages 1-40, March.
    7. Hammond,J. Daniel, 1996. "Theory and Measurement," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521552059.
    8. Keuzenkamp,Hugo A., 2000. "Probability, Econometrics and Truth," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521553599.
    9. anonymous, 1992. "Interview with Milton Friedman," The Region, Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, issue June.
    10. Hausman,Daniel M., 1992. "The Inexact and Separate Science of Economics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521415019, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Morten Søberg, 2002. "The Duhem-Quine thesis and experimental economics. A reinterpretation," Discussion Papers 329, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    2. Søberg, Morten, 2003. "The Duhem-Quine thesis and experimental economics: A reinterpretation," Memorandum 21/2002, Oslo University, Department of Economics.
    3. Itzhak Gilboa & Andrew Postlewaite & Larry Samuelson & David Schmeidler, 2011. "Economic Models as Analogies," PIER Working Paper Archive 12-001, Penn Institute for Economic Research, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania.
    4. Itzhak Gilboa & Andrew Postlewaite & Larry Samuelson & David Schmeidler, 2014. "A Model of Modeling," PIER Working Paper Archive 14-026, Penn Institute for Economic Research, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania.
    5. Thomas Mayer, 2006. "The Empirical Significance of Econometric Models," Working Papers 620, University of California, Davis, Department of Economics.
    6. Heather Anderson, 1999. "Explanations of an empirical puzzle: what can be learnt from a test of the rational expectations hypothesis?," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(1), pages 31-59.
    7. I. Gilboa & A. Postlewaite & L. Samuelson & D. Schmeidler, 2015. "Economic models as analogies," Voprosy Ekonomiki, NP Voprosy Ekonomiki, issue 4.
    8. 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.
    9. Turan Yay & Huseyin Tastan, 2010. "Invisible Hand in the Process of Making Economics or on the Method and Scope of Economics," Panoeconomicus, Savez ekonomista Vojvodine, Novi Sad, Serbia, vol. 57(1), pages 61-83, March.
    10. Kevin Hoover & Mark Siegler, 2008. "Sound and fury: McCloskey and significance testing in economics," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(1), pages 1-37.
    11. Galbács, Péter, 2018. "A közgazdaságtan felszabadítása. A neoklasszikus ortodoxia és az intézményi közgazdaságtan közötti ellentét néhány módszertani kérdése [Freedom for economics. Some methodological aspects of the neo," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(1), pages 44-65.
    12. Stefania Sitzia & Robert Sugden, 2011. "Implementing theoretical models in the laboratory, and what this can and cannot achieve," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(4), pages 323-343, December.
    13. Roger Backhouse & Andrea Salanti, 1999. "The methodology of macroeconomics," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(2), pages 159-169.
    14. Ralph W Bailey, 2012. "Human Economists and Abstract Methodology," Economic Issues Journal Articles, Economic Issues, vol. 17(1), pages 49-75, March.
    15. Itzhak Gilboa & Andrew Postlewaite & Larry Samuelson & David Schmeidler, 2018. "Economics: Between Prediction And Criticism," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 59(2), pages 367-390, May.
    16. Stavros A. Drakopoulos & Anastassios D. Karayiannis, 2005. "A Review of Kuhnian and Lakatosian «Explanations» in Economics," History of Economic Ideas, Fabrizio Serra Editore, Pisa - Roma, vol. 13(2), pages 51-73.
    17. Francesco Guala & Andrea Salanti, 2002. "On the Robustness of Economic Models," Working Papers (-2012) 0208, University of Bergamo, Department of Economics.
    18. 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.
    19. Scott Scheall, 2017. "What is extreme about Mises’s extreme apriorism?," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(3), pages 226-249, July.
    20. Ricardo F. Crespo, 2012. "Models as signs" as "good economic models," Estudios Economicos, Universidad Nacional del Sur, Departamento de Economia, vol. 29(58), pages 1-12, january-j.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    General methodology; falsificationism; Popper; Hayek; Duhem; Duhemian Argument; Testing of Theories; Meaning and Interpretation of Econometric Results; Correlation and Causality;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • E0 - Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics - - General
    • B4 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Economic Methodology
    • C1 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:pra:mprapa:6067. 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: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.html .

    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.