IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bus/jphile/v1y2008i2p26-50.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Methodological Monism in Economics

Author

Listed:
  • Tamás Dusek

    (Széchenyi István University)

Abstract

The aim of the paper is to give an outline of the relation between general epistemology and the epistemology of economics. The epistemology of economics can be treated starting from the ‘general epistemology of science’ and from the subject of the investigation, namely the problems of economics itself. Starting from the general or subject-independent epistemology one can make an attempt to adapt to economics various methodological approaches which were practically created to take only the subject of physics or mathematics into consideration. The characteristic feature of this mentality is often methodological monism, a doctrine which implicitly or explicitly states the unity of epistemology in all disciplines. In methodological writings of economics, beside the supporters of some general epistemological viewpoints, there are serious critics of them on behalf of methodologists who start their researches based on economics. Methodological pluralism does not reject the importation of methodological ideas from other branches of knowledge in an aprioristic way. However, the uncritical adoption of the methodology of physical sciences or ‘general’ methodology leads to the realm of inadequacy and dogmatism. According to methodological pluralism, every research has to choose its methods and methodology conforming to the nature of its own problems. The theoretical consequences of methodological monism are not always obvious. Inappropriate methodology can lead to inappropriate theories and inappropriate practical decisions. The negative consequences of formalism will be illustrated by some spatial economic issues in the field of money and price theory, such as the empirical empty doctrine of purchasing power parity and the theory of optimal currency areas. Since neoclassical mainstream is monist, therefore the critique of monism is at the same time the critique of the method of neoclassical mainstream.

Suggested Citation

  • Tamás Dusek, 2008. "Methodological Monism in Economics," The Journal of Philosophical Economics, Bucharest Academy of Economic Studies, The Journal of Philosophical Economics, vol. 1(2), pages 26-50, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:bus:jphile:v:1:y:2008:i:2:p:26-50
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://jpe.ro/pdf.php?id=2848
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: http://jpe.ro/?id=revista&p=136
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Deirdre N. McCloskey & Stephen T. Ziliak, 1996. "The Standard Error of Regressions," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 34(1), pages 97-114, March.
    2. Stephen T. Ziliak & Deirdre N. McCloskey, 2004. "Size Matters: The Standard Error of Regressions in the American Economic Review," Econ Journal Watch, Econ Journal Watch, vol. 1(2), pages 331-358, August.
    3. Frankel, Jeffrey A & Rose, Andrew K, 1998. "The Endogeneity of the Optimum Currency Area Criteria," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 108(449), pages 1009-1025, July.
    4. Debreu, Gerard, 1986. "Theoretical Models: Mathematical Forms and Economic Content," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 54(6), pages 1259-1270, November.
    5. Kumaraswamy Velupillai, 1996. "The Computable Alternative in the Formalization of Economics: A Counterfactual Essay," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 49(3), pages 251-272, August.
    6. Fujita , Masahisa & Krugman, Paul, 2004. "The new economic geography: Past, present and the future," INVESTIGACIONES REGIONALES - Journal of REGIONAL RESEARCH, Asociación Española de Ciencia Regional, issue 4, pages 177-206.
    7. Deirdre McCloskey, 2005. "The Trouble with Mathematics and Statistics in Economics," History of Economic Ideas, Fabrizio Serra Editore, Pisa - Roma, vol. 13(3), pages 85-102.
    8. Loasby, Brian J, 1971. "Hypothesis and Paradigm in the Theory of the Firm," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 81(324), pages 863-885, December.
    9. Ishikawa, Shigeru, 1980. "Economic growth and distribution in China : Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1978. xi + 244 pp. index. Cloth, $18.95," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 4(3), pages 350-355, September.
    10. Weintraub, E Roy, 1998. "Controversy: Axiomatisches Missverstandnis," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 108(451), pages 1837-1847, November.
    11. Dow, Sheila, 2002. "Economic Methodology: An Inquiry," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198776123.
    12. Abuaf, Niso & Jorion, Philippe, 1990. "Purchasing Power Parity in the Long Run," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 45(1), pages 157-174, March.
    13. Corbae, Dean & Ouliaris, Sam, 1988. "Cointegration and Tests of Purchasing Power Parity," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 70(3), pages 508-511, August.
    14. Velupillai, Kumaraswamy, 1996. "The Computable Alternative in the Formalization of Economics: A Counterfactual Essay," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 49(3), pages 251-272.
    15. Musgrave, Alan, 1981. "'Unreal Assumptions' in Economic Theory: The F-Twist Untwisted," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(3), pages 377-387.
    16. Crownover, Collin & Pippenger, John & Steigerwald, Douglas G., 1996. "Testing for absolute purchasing power parity," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 15(5), pages 783-796, October.
    17. Coats, A W, 1969. "Is There a "Structure of Scientific Revolutions" in Economics?," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 22(2), pages 289-296.
    18. Mark Blaug, 1975. "Kuhn Versus Lakatos, or Paradigms Versus Research Programmes in the History of Economics," History of Political Economy, Duke University Press, vol. 7(4), pages 399-433, Winter.
    19. Backhouse, Roger E, 1998. "If Mathematics Is Informal, Then Perhaps We Should Accept That Economics Must Be Informal Too," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 108(451), pages 1848-1858, November.
    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. Beckenbach, Frank, 2019. "Monism in modern science: The case of (micro-)economics," Working Paper Series Ök-49, Cusanus Hochschule für Gesellschaftsgestaltung, Institut für Ökonomie.

    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. 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.
    2. Arize, Augustine C. & Malindretos, John & Ghosh, Dilip, 2015. "Purchasing power parity-symmetry and proportionality: Evidence from 116 countries," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 69-85.
    3. John D. Levendis, 2018. "Time Series Econometrics," Springer Texts in Business and Economics, Springer, number 978-3-319-98282-3, April.
    4. Joseph M. Kargbo, 2004. "Purchasing Power Parity And Exchange Rate Policy Reforms In Africa," South African Journal of Economics, Economic Society of South Africa, vol. 72(2), pages 258-281, June.
    5. Rachel G. Childers, 2011. "Being One'S Own Boss: How Does Risk Fit In?," The American Economist, Sage Publications, vol. 56(1), pages 48-58, May.
    6. Ricardo Barradas & Ines Tomas, 2023. "Household indebtedness in the European Union countries: Going beyond the mainstream interpretation," PSL Quarterly Review, Economia civile, vol. 76(304), pages 21-49.
    7. Emrah Kocak & Hayriye Hilal Baglitas, 2022. "The path to sustainable municipal solid waste management: Do human development, energy efficiency, and income inequality matter?," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(6), pages 1947-1962, December.
    8. Fine, Ben, 2002. "Economics Imperialism and the New Development Economics as Kuhnian Paradigm Shift?," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 30(12), pages 2057-2070, December.
    9. Miguel A. Duran, 2007. "Mathematical Needs and Economic Interpretations," Contributions to Political Economy, Oxford University Press, vol. 26(1), pages 1-16.
    10. Anupama Sen and Tooraj Jamasb, 2012. "Diversity in Unity: An Empirical Analysis of Electricity Deregulation in Indian States," The Energy Journal, International Association for Energy Economics, vol. 0(Number 1).
    11. Peter J. Veazie, 2015. "Understanding Statistical Testing," SAGE Open, , vol. 5(1), pages 21582440145, January.
    12. Goh, Soo Khoon & Mithani, Dawood, 2000. "Deviation from Purchasing Power Parity: Evidence from Malaysia, 1973–1997," MPRA Paper 51922, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Okimoto, Tatsuyoshi & Shimotsu, Katsumi, 2010. "Decline in the persistence of real exchange rates, but not sufficient for purchasing power parity," Journal of the Japanese and International Economies, Elsevier, vol. 24(3), pages 395-411, September.
    14. Andrew Phiri, 2017. "Nonlinear adjustment effects in the purchasing power parity," Journal of Economics and Econometrics, Economics and Econometrics Society, vol. 60(2), pages 14-38.
    15. Xinyu (Jason) Cao, 2009. "Disentangling the influence of neighborhood type and self-selection on driving behavior: an application of sample selection model," Transportation, Springer, vol. 36(2), pages 207-222, March.
    16. Param Silvapulle & Titi Kanti Lestari & Jae Kim, 2004. "Nonlinear Modelling of Purchasing Power Parity in Indonesia," Econometric Society 2004 Australasian Meetings 316, Econometric Society.
    17. Tolga Omay & Furkan Emirmahmutoglu & Mubariz Hasanov, 2018. "Structural break, nonlinearity and asymmetry: a re-examination of PPP proposition," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 50(12), pages 1289-1308, March.
    18. Stephen T. Ziliak & Deirdre N. McCloskey, 2013. "We Agree That Statistical Significance Proves Essentially Nothing: A Rejoinder to Thomas Mayer," Econ Journal Watch, Econ Journal Watch, vol. 10(1), pages 97-107, January.
    19. Ritesh Kumar Mishra & Sanjay Sehgal, 2011. "Exchange rates and prices in purchasing power parity framework: Are bilateral real exchange rates stationary?," International Journal of Economic Policy in Emerging Economies, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 4(3), pages 274-286.
    20. Alan M. Taylor & Mark P. Taylor, 2004. "The Purchasing Power Parity Debate," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 18(4), pages 135-158, Fall.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    methodology of economics; methodological monism; methodological pluralism;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • B41 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Economic Methodology - - - Economic Methodology

    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:bus:jphile:v:1:y:2008:i:2:p:26-50. 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: Valentin Cojanu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aseeero.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.