Die ökonomische Tradition und die Verfassung der Wissenschaft
The usual view on the division of labour between the philosophy of science and economics is mistaken. The concentration on formal problems in both sciences has concealed the convergence of their problems. This convergence has been revealed by the institutional change in both sciences. The common problems of these sciences are related to the explanation of phenomena in the realm of knowledge. For this assumptions are needed about problem-solving behavior of competing individuals. The institutional theory of the progress of knowledge by Karl Popper refers to this competition. One of the rewards desired in this competiton is the acknowledgment of the value of the solutions offered by the competitors. These solutions are goods which are evaluated by rules of method. The competition in science can be seen as a competition for status in the framework of incentive-compatible rules in which bilateral exchange plays no role. The question to what extent the institutional arrangements in the realm of science in the western world are adequate for the progress of knowledge may have different answers for different countries. Copyright Verein für Socialpolitik und Blackwell Publishers Ltd, 2006
If 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.
Volume (Year): 7 (2006)
Issue (Month): s1 (05)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=1465-6493|
More information through EDIRC
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/subs.asp?ref=1465-6493|
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Albert, Max, 1996. "Bayesian learning and expectations formation: Anything goes," Discussion Papers, Series I 284, University of Konstanz, Department of Economics.
- Viktor Vanberg, 2004. "The rationality postulate in economics: its ambiguity, its deficiency and its evolutionary alternative," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(1), pages 1-29.
- Paula E. Stephan, 1996. "The Economics of Science," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 34(3), pages 1199-1235, September.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:bla:perwir:v:7:y:2006:i:s1:p:113-131. See general 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: (Wiley-Blackwell Digital Licensing)or (Christopher F. Baum)
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.