IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/lat/legeco/2003-02.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Science économique et sens commun : trois thèses sur leurs relations réciproques

Author

Listed:
  • SALMON, Pierre

    (LATEC Université de Bourgogne)

Abstract

Trois thèses sur la relation entre science économique et sens commun sont défendues dans cet essai. La première est que la science économique trouve dans la critique des vérités supposées du sens commun un facteur providentiel de légitimité. A cette fin, elle s'est en partie employée à révéler et expliciter des mécanismes sous-jacents surprenants ou paradoxaux par rapport aux idées reçues. La deuxième thèse est que l'opposition entre le langage théorique et celui du sens commun constitue pour l'essentiel, malgré sa popularité, un faux problème. Il y a moins opposition entre deux langages que, très largement, complémentarité. La troisième thèse est programmatique: la réflexion philosophique sur la science économique doit s'efforcer de découvrir le passage étroit permettant de conserver quelque chose de deux idées: celle que la science économique révèle des mécanismes ou des interactions ignorés par le sens commun et l'argument selon lequel toute supériorité informationnelle durable de l'observateur sur l'observé et toute inefficacité persistante demandent une explication.

Suggested Citation

  • SALMON, Pierre, 2002. "Science économique et sens commun : trois thèses sur leurs relations réciproques," LEG - Document de travail - Economie 2003-02, LEG, Laboratoire d'Economie et de Gestion, CNRS, Université de Bourgogne, revised Jan 2003.
    • Handle: RePEc:lat:legeco:2003-02
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pierre Salmon, 1996. "Free riding as mechanism," Working Papers hal-01526985, HAL.
    2. SALMON, Pierre, 1999. "Modèles et mécanismes en économie: essai de clarification de leurs relations," LATEC - Document de travail - Economie (1991-2003) 1999-15, LATEC, Laboratoire d'Analyse et des Techniques EConomiques, CNRS UMR 5118, Université de Bourgogne.
    3. McCloskey, Deirdre Nansen, 1990. "If You're So Smart," University of Chicago Press Economics Books, University of Chicago Press, edition 1, number 9780226556703, September.
    4. Caplan, Bryan, 2001. "What Makes People Think Like Economists? Evidence on Economic Cognition from the "Survey of Americans and Economists on the Economy."," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 44(2), pages 395-426, October.
    5. Davis, John B, 1999. "Common Sense: A Middle Way between Formalism and Post-Structuralism?," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 23(4), pages 503-515, July.
    6. Salmon, Pierre, 1994. "Outrageous arguments in economics and public choice," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 10(3), pages 409-426, October.
    7. Pierre Salmon, 2002. "La logique de l'action collective, de Mancur Olson," Post-Print hal-00445625, HAL.
    8. Coates,John, 1996. "The Claims of Common Sense," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521412568.
    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. Miguel A. Duran, 2007. "Mathematical Needs and Economic Interpretations," Contributions to Political Economy, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 26(1), pages 1-16.
    2. Pierre Salmon, 2001. "Constitutional Implications of Electoral Assumptions," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 12(4), pages 333-349, December.
    3. Sheila C. Dow, 2014. "Consistency in pluralism and microfoundations," Working Papers PKWP1408, Post Keynesian Economics Society (PKES).
    4. SALMON, Pierre, 2005. "Qu'est-ce qui représente quoi? Réflexions sur la nature et le rôle des modèles en économie," LEG - Document de travail - Economie 2005-07, LEG, Laboratoire d'Economie et de Gestion, CNRS, Université de Bourgogne.
    5. Leunbach, Daniel, 2021. "Entrepreneurship as a family resemblance concept: A Wittgensteinian approach to the problem of defining entrepreneurship," Scandinavian Journal of Management, Elsevier, vol. 37(1).
    6. Bryan Caplan & Edward Stringham, 2005. "Mises, bastiat, public opinion, and public choice," Review of Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(1), pages 79-105.
    7. Dow Alexander & Dow Sheila C., 2011. "Animal Spirits Revisited," Capitalism and Society, De Gruyter, vol. 6(2), pages 1-25, December.
    8. Andrew Mearman, 2010. "What is this thing called ‘heterodox economics’?," Working Papers 1006, Department of Accounting, Economics and Finance, Bristol Business School, University of the West of England, Bristol.
    9. Derek Matthews, 2007. "The performance of British manufacturing in the Post-War long boom," Business History, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 49(6), pages 763-779.
    10. Amartya Sen, 2003. "Sraffa, Wittgenstein, and Gramsci," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 41(4), pages 1240-1255, December.
    11. Daniel Levy & Avichai Snir, 2022. "Potterian economics," Oxford Open Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 1, pages 1-32.
    12. Roger Backhouse & Bradley Bateman, 2006. "John Maynard Keynes: Artist, Philosopher, Economist," Atlantic Economic Journal, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 34(2), pages 149-159, June.
    13. Hervé Dumez & Alain Jeunemaître, 2005. "La démarche narrative en économie," Revue économique, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 56(4), pages 983-1005.
    14. Berg, Nathan & Biele, Guido & Gigerenzer, Gerd, 2010. "Does consistency predict accuracy of beliefs?: Economists surveyed about PSA," MPRA Paper 26590, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. J.R. Clark & Ashley S. Harrison & Bradley K. Hobbs, 2011. "The Current Status of Free Enterprise Chairs and Professorships in Academe," Journal of Private Enterprise, The Association of Private Enterprise Education, vol. 26(Spring 20), pages 15-46.
    16. Mary Morgan, 2001. "Models, stories and the economic world," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(3), pages 361-384.
    17. Eric Crampton & Matt Burgess & Brad Taylor, 2011. "The Cost of Cost Studies," Working Papers in Economics 11/29, University of Canterbury, Department of Economics and Finance.
    18. Klein, Daniel B. & Stern, Charlotta, 2005. "Narrow-Tent Democrats and Fringe Others: The Policy Views of Social Science Professors," Working Paper Series 8/2005, Stockholm University, Swedish Institute for Social Research.
    19. Thomas Dohmen, 2001. "Building and using economic models: a case study analysis of the IS-LL model," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(2), pages 191-212.
    20. Salmon Pierre, 1996. "Le public choice est-il dogmatique? Non, comme le montre Current Issues in Public Choice," Journal des Economistes et des Etudes Humaines, De Gruyter, vol. 7(1), pages 1-9, March.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • B4 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Economic Methodology

    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:lat:legeco:2003-02. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/latecfr.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.