IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

The Oomph in economic philosophy: a bibliometric analysis of the main trends, from the 1960s to the present

  • Yalcintas, Altug

In this essay, I quantitatively analyze the significance of scholarship in economic philosophy since the 1960s. In order to do so, I examine, through the number of publications and citations, the evolution of the main trends in economic philosophy over a fifty years period. This paper will develop a better conception of how the pathways of major debates, in particular rhetoric of economics (RoE) versus realism in economics (RiE), helped economic philosophy achieve its present status in economics. Viewed through this lens, it is clear that the main trends in the recent history of the discipline have emerged out of the concerns of non-mainstream economists since the 1980s.

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.

File URL: http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/44191/1/MPRA_paper_44191.pdf
File Function: original version
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by University Library of Munich, Germany in its series MPRA Paper with number 44191.

as
in new window

Length:
Date of creation: 2013
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:44191
Contact details of provider: Postal: Schackstr. 4, D-80539 Munich, Germany
Phone: +49-(0)89-2180-2219
Fax: +49-(0)89-2180-3900
Web page: http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de

More information through EDIRC

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.:

as in new window
  1. Geoffrey M. Hodgson, 1998. "The Approach of Institutional Economics," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 36(1), pages 166-192, March.
  2. Roger Backhouse, 2010. "Methodology in action," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(1), pages 3-15.
  3. Altug Yalcintas, 2012. "A notion evolving: From 'institutional path dependence' to 'intellectual path dependence'," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 32(2), pages 1091-1098.
  4. Rosenberg, Alexander, 1988. "Rhetoric is not Important Enough for Economists to Bother About," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 4(01), pages 173-175, April.
  5. repec:dgr:uvatin:20010022 is not listed on IDEAS
  6. Hausman, Daniel M, 1989. "Economic Methodology in a Nutshell," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 3(2), pages 115-27, Spring.
  7. Ziliak, Stephen T. & McCloskey, Deirdre N., 2004. "Significance redux," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 33(5), pages 665-675, November.
  8. Boland, Lawrence A, 1979. "A Critique of Friedman's Critics," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 17(2), pages 503-22, June.
  9. John B. Davis, 2007. "The turn in economics and the turn in economic methodology," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(3), pages 275-290.
  10. D Wade Hands, 1997. "Empirical Realism as Meta-Method: Tony Lawson on Neoclassical Economics," Ekonomia, Cyprus Economic Society and University of Cyprus, vol. 1(2), pages 39-53, Winter.
  11. McCloskey, Donald N, 1983. "The Rhetoric of Economics," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 21(2), pages 481-517, June.
  12. Daniel B. Klein & Eric Chiang, 2004. "The Social Science Citation Index: A Black Box—with an Ideological Bias?," Econ Journal Watch, Econ Journal Watch, vol. 1(1), pages 134-165, April.
  13. Lawson, Clive & Peacock, Mark & Pratten, Stephen, 1996. "Realism, Underlabouring and Institutions: Review Article," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 20(1), pages 137-51, January.
  14. Hausman, Daniel M., 1998. "Problems with Realism in Economics," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 14(02), pages 185-213, October.
  15. Tony Lawson, 2006. "The nature of heterodox economics," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 30(4), pages 483-505, July.
  16. Jack Vromen, 2004. "Conjectural revisionary economic ontology: Outline of an ambitious research agenda for evolutionary economics," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(2), pages 213-247.
  17. Lawson, Tony, 1989. "Abstraction, Tendencies and Stylised Facts: A Realist Approach to Economic Analysis," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 13(1), pages 59-78, March.
  18. repec:cup:cbooks:9780521797962 is not listed on IDEAS
  19. Gerrard, Bill, 1990. " On Matters Methodological in Economics: Review Article," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 4(2), pages 197-219.
  20. Duncan Hodge, 2007. "Economics, realism and reality: a comparison of Mäki and Lawson," Working Papers 63, Economic Research Southern Africa.
  21. D. Wade Hands, 2002. "Economic methodology is dead - long live economic methodology: thirteen theses on the new economic methodology," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(1), pages 49-63.
  22. repec:cup:cbooks:9780521451895 is not listed on IDEAS
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:44191. 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: (Ekkehart Schlicht)

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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.