IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/jecmet/v17y2010i3p277-299.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Certainly not! A critical realist recasting of Ludwig von Mises's methodology of the social sciences

Author

Listed:
  • Paul Lewis

Abstract

This paper focuses on Ludwig von Mises methodological apriorism. It uses Wittgenstein's private language argument as the basis for a critique of Mises's claim to have found apodictically certain foundations for economic analysis. It is argued instead that Mises's methodology is more fruitfully viewed as an exercise in social ontology, the objective of which is to outline key features of the socio-economic world that social scientific research ought to take into account if it is to be fruitful. The implications of this perspective for three key methodological issues, namely the relationship between theory and history, the possibility of naturalism, and the place of Austrian economics within the discipline of economics as a whole, are brought out.

Suggested Citation

  • Paul Lewis, 2010. "Certainly not! A critical realist recasting of Ludwig von Mises's methodology of the social sciences," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(3), pages 277-299.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:jecmet:v:17:y:2010:i:3:p:277-299
    DOI: 10.1080/1350178X.2010.500503
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/1350178X.2010.500503
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/1350178X.2010.500503?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. Peter J. Boettke (ed.), 1994. "The Elgar Companion to Austrian Economics," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 53.
    2. Bruce J. Caldwell, 1984. "Praxeology and its Critics: an Appraisal," History of Political Economy, Duke University Press, vol. 16(3), pages 363-379, Fall.
    3. Vaughn,Karen I., 1994. "Austrian Economics in America," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521445528.
    4. Peter Leeson & Peter Boettke, 2006. "Was Mises right?," Review of Social Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 64(2), pages 247-265.
    5. Lewis, Paul & Runde, Jochen, 2007. "Subjectivism, social structure and the possibility of socio-economic order: The case of Ludwig Lachmann," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 62(2), pages 167-186, February.
    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. Solomon Stein & Virgil Henry Storr, 2023. "The market as foreground: The ontological status of the market in market process theory," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 36(1), pages 1-21, March.
    2. Hartmut Kliemt, 2017. "ABC – Austria, Bloomington, Chicago: Political Economy the Ostrom Way," Advances in Austrian Economics, in: The Austrian and Bloomington Schools of Political Economy, volume 22, pages 1-33, Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

    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. Virgil Storr, 2010. "Schütz on meaning and culture," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 23(2), pages 147-163, June.
    2. Don Lavoie & Virgil Storr, 2011. "Distinction or dichotomy: Rethinking the line between thymology and praxeology," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 24(2), pages 213-233, June.
    3. Michael Litschka & Kristoffel Grechenig, 2010. "Law by human intent or evolution? Some remarks on the Austrian school of economics’ role in the development of law and economics," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 29(1), pages 57-79, February.
    4. Marcello Basili & Carlo Zappia, 2010. "Ambiguity and uncertainty in Ellsberg and Shackle," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 34(3), pages 449-474.
    5. Marian Eabrasu, 2008. "An Assessment of Subjectivism. Its Meaning and its Limits," ICER Working Papers 01-2008, ICER - International Centre for Economic Research.
    6. Zanotti, Gabriel J. & Cachanosky, Nicolás, 2015. "Implications Of Machlup’S Interpretation Of Mises’S Epistemology," Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Cambridge University Press, vol. 37(1), pages 111-138, March.
    7. Reinhard Neck, 2014. "On Austrian Economics and the Economics of Carl Menger," Atlantic Economic Journal, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 42(3), pages 217-227, September.
    8. Anthony Endres, 2013. "Is the economics of time and ignorance a “classic”?," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 26(1), pages 17-25, March.
    9. Gilles Campagnolo, 2018. "From Karl Menger to Charles Menger? How Austrian economics (hardly) spread in France," Russian Journal of Economics, ARPHA Platform, vol. 4(1), pages 8-30, April.
    10. Chamilall Neelkant S., 2000. "La Genese Du Label Autricheen': La Pensee De Carl Menger," Journal des Economistes et des Etudes Humaines, De Gruyter, vol. 10(1), pages 1-66, March.
    11. 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.
    12. Virgil Storr, 2011. "On the hermeneutics debate: An introduction to a symposium on Don Lavoie's “The Interpretive Dimension of Economics—Science, Hermeneutics, and Praxeology”," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 24(2), pages 85-89, June.
    13. Yong Yik Wei & Aekapol Chongvilaivan & Chew Jing Yang, 2008. "Alternative Approaches to the Development of Early Childhood Education in Singapore," Development Economics Working Papers 22581, East Asian Bureau of Economic Research.
    14. Nicolai J. Foss & Giampaolo Garzarelli, 2007. "Institutions as knowledge capital: Ludwig M. Lachmann's interpretative institutionalism," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 31(5), pages 789-804, September.
    15. Gilles Campagnolo & Christel Vivel, 2020. "Kirzner and Rothbard on an Austrian theory of entrepreneurship: the heirs of both Menger and Mises discuss action and the role of institutions," Working Papers halshs-03107316, HAL.
    16. Stefka Koeva, 2006. "About the Austrian Economic Theory, Mises, Hayek and More: a Provoked Answe," Economic Thought journal, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences - Economic Research Institute, issue 6, pages 64-74.
    17. Carlo Zappia, 2008. "Non-Bayesian decision theory ante-litteram: the case of G. L. S. Shackle," Department of Economic Policy, Finance and Development (DEPFID) University of Siena 0408, Department of Economic Policy, Finance and Development (DEPFID), University of Siena.
    18. Vanberg, Viktor J., 2004. "Austrian Economics, Evolutionary Psychology and Methodological Dualism: Subjectivism Reconsidered," Freiburg Discussion Papers on Constitutional Economics 04/3, Walter Eucken Institut e.V..
    19. David Dequech, 2008. "Varieties of uncertainty: a survey of the economic literature," Anais do XXXVI Encontro Nacional de Economia [Proceedings of the 36th Brazilian Economics Meeting] 200807211223070, ANPEC - Associação Nacional dos Centros de Pós-Graduação em Economia [Brazilian Association of Graduate Programs in Economics].
    20. Madarász, Aladár, 2002. "Kameralizmus, történelmi iskola, osztrák gazdaságtan. Három vázlat a német és osztrák közgazdasági diskurzus történetéből [Cameralism, the historical school and Austrian economics. Three outlines f," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(10), pages 838-857.

    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:17:y:2010:i:3:p:277-299. 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.