IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cda/wpaper/04-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Influence Of Friedman'S Methodological Essay

Author

Listed:
  • Thomas Mayer

    (Department of Economics, University of California Davis)

Abstract

Many leading methodologists have described the central role that Milton Friedman''s 1953 essay (henceforth referred to as F53) has played in methodological discussions. (See for instance Daniel Hammond, 1998; Kevin Hoover; 2001; Roger Backhouse 2002.) However, it does not necessarily follow that it has had a great influence on the practice of economics, because practicing economists pay little attention to free-standing discussions of methodology; at best they learn their methodology by seeing it put to work on substantive problems.1 Arguably, Friedman and Schwartz''s (1963) A Monetary History of the United States, has had more influence on the methodology of practicing economist than did F53. The most pervasive methodological influence in macroeconomics in the last thirty years has been the insistence of new classical economists on reducing macroeconomics to microeconomics, and in this they paid no attention to philosophical debates about reductionism

Suggested Citation

  • Thomas Mayer, 2004. "The Influence Of Friedman'S Methodological Essay," Working Papers 41, University of California, Davis, Department of Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:cda:wpaper:04-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://wp.econ.ucdavis.edu/04-1.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bryan Boulier & Robert Goldfarb, 1998. "On the use and nonuse of surveys in economics," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(1), pages 1-21.
    2. Allais, Maurice, 1997. "An Outline of My Main Contributions to Economic Science," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 87(6), pages 3-12, December.
    3. Colander, David, 1993. "The Lost Art of Economics: Response," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 7(3), pages 213-215, Summer.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    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:cda:wpaper:04-1. 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: (Scott Dyer). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/educdus.html .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.