IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/uto/cesmep/201701.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Disputed (Disciplinary) Boundaries. Philosophy, Economics, Value Judgments

Author

Abstract

This paper aims to address the following two questions: a) what is the logic of the kind of discourse that seeks to found, demarcate or defend the autonomy or the boundaries of a discipline; b) why does this discourse, whether methodological, ontological or epistemological, sometimes turn into normative, dogmatic-excommunicating wrangles among disciplines, schools or scholars? I will argue that an adequate answer may be found if we understand: 1) disciplines as institutions and, therefore, as dogmatic systems, where scholars’ discourse often takes the form of a legitimizing discourse regarding the founding Reference of their own discipline; 2) that scholars speak in the name of that very foundation, with which they closely identify; 3) that the issue of the legitimacy of a discipline cannot easily be separated from the issue of identity and, therefore, of a scholar’s legitimacy; 4) that the excommunication may arise not only when the founding Reference is absolutized, but also as a form of self-defense of a scholar’s identity-legitimacy. To understand these claims I will re-examine three paradigmatic positions: the methodological, ontological and epistemological considerations put forward by (and the debates between) Pareto, Croce and Einaudi – with specific reference to the demarcation between philosophy, economics and value-judgments.

Suggested Citation

  • Silvestri, Paolo, 2017. "Disputed (Disciplinary) Boundaries. Philosophy, Economics, Value Judgments," CESMEP Working Papers 201701, University of Turin.
  • Handle: RePEc:uto:cesmep:201701
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.est.unito.it/do/home.pl/Download?doc=/allegati/wp2017dip/wp_4_2017.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Roberto Marchionatti & Francesco Cassata & Giandomenica Becchio & Fiorenzo Mornati, 2013. "When Italian economics "Was Second to None". Luigi Einaudi and the Turin School of Economics," The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(5), pages 776-811, October.
    2. Silvestri, Paolo, 2007. "Rileggendo Einaudi e Croce: spunti per un liberalismo fondato su un’antropologia della libertà [Re-reading Einaudi and Croce: hints for a liberalism founded on an anthropology of freedom]," MPRA Paper 59612, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2006.
    3. Silvestri, Paolo, 2011. "Buon governo [Good government]," MPRA Paper 62315, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2010.
    4. Luigino Bruni, 2002. "Vilfredo Pareto and the Birth of Modern Microeconomics," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2238.
    5. Philippe Mongin, 2006. "Value Judgments and Value Neutrality in Economics," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 73(290), pages 257-286, May.
    6. Antoinette Baujard, 2013. "Value judgments and economics expertise," Working Papers 1314, Groupe d'Analyse et de Théorie Economique Lyon St-Étienne (GATE Lyon St-Étienne), Université de Lyon.
    7. Aldo Montesano, 2003. "Croce e la scienza economica," Economia politica, Società editrice il Mulino, issue 2, pages 201-224.
    8. Forte, Francesco & Silvestri, Paolo, 2015. "Luigi Einaudi," MPRA Paper 62319, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2014.
    9. Amedeo Fossati & Paolo Silvestri, 2012. "Un inedito dissidio epistemologico sui miti e paradossi della giustizia tributaria di einaudi: le lettere perdute di Mauro Fasiani," STUDI ECONOMICI, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2012(108), pages 5-80.
    10. John B. Davis & Alain Marciano & Jochen Runde (ed.), 2004. "The Elgar Companion To Economics and Philosophy," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2696.
    11. Francesco Forte & Roberto Marchionatti, 2012. "Luigi Einaudi's economics of liberalism," The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(4), pages 587-624, August.
    12. Silvestri, Paolo, 2010. "Veritas, Auctoritas, Lex. Scienza economica e sfera pubblica: sulla normatività del 'Terzo' [Veritas, Auctoritas, Lex. Economic Science and Public Sphere: On the Normativity of the 'Third']," MPRA Paper 59538, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2009.
    13. Patrick Mardellat, 2009. "Max Weber's critical response to theoretical economics," The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(4), pages 599-624.
    14. Silvestri, Paolo, 2012. "The ideal of good government in Luigi Einaudi's Thought and Life: Between Law and Freedom," MPRA Paper 55351, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Silvestri, Paolo, 2010. "Liberalismo, legge, normatività. Per una rilettura epistemologica del dibattito Croce-Einaudi [Liberalism, law, normativity. For an epistemological re-reading of the Croce-Einaudi debate]," MPRA Paper 60051, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2009.
    16. Constanze Binder & Conrad Heilmann & Jack Vromen, 2015. "The future of the philosophy of economics: papers from the XI. INEM Conference at Erasmus University Rotterdam," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(3), pages 261-263, September.
    17. Marchionatti, Roberto & Gambino, Enrico, 1997. "Pareto and Political Economy as a Science: Methodological Revolution and Analytical Advances in Economic Theory in the 1890s," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 105(6), pages 1322-1348, December.
    18. Kincaid, Harold & Ross, Don (ed.), 2009. "The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Economics," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195189254.
    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. Galbács, Péter, 2018. "A közgazdaságtan felszabadítása. A neoklasszikus ortodoxia és az intézményi közgazdaságtan közötti ellentét néhány módszertani kérdése [Freedom for economics. Some methodological aspects of the neo," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(1), pages 44-65.

    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. Paolo Silvestri, 2016. "Disputed (Disciplinary) Boundaries: Philosophy, Economics and Value Judgments," History of Economic Ideas, Fabrizio Serra Editore, Pisa - Roma, vol. 24(3), pages 187-221.
    2. Silvestri, Paolo, 2010. "Liberalismo, legge, normatività. Per una rilettura epistemologica del dibattito Croce-Einaudi [Liberalism, law, normativity. For an epistemological re-reading of the Croce-Einaudi debate]," MPRA Paper 60051, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2009.
    3. Silvestri, Paolo, 2015. "Anthropology of Freedom and Tax Justice: Between Exchange and Gift. Thoughts for an Interdisciplinary Research Agenda," Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis. Working Papers 201534, University of Turin.
    4. Silvestri, Paolo, 2012. "The ideal of good government in Luigi Einaudi's Thought and Life: Between Law and Freedom," MPRA Paper 55351, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Silvestri, Paolo, 2007. "Rileggendo Einaudi e Croce: spunti per un liberalismo fondato su un’antropologia della libertà [Re-reading Einaudi and Croce: hints for a liberalism founded on an anthropology of freedom]," MPRA Paper 59612, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2006.
    6. Silvestri, Paolo, 2009. "Mosca, Ruffini ed Einaudi: Politica, diritto ed economia in difesa della libertà [Mosca, Ruffini and Einaudi: politics, jurisprudence and economics in defence of freedom]," MPRA Paper 59548, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2009.
    7. Meinard, Y. & Cailloux, O., 2020. "On justifying the norms underlying decision support," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 285(3), pages 1002-1010.
    8. Groß Steffen W., 2010. "Warum sich Ökonomen (wieder) mit Philosophie beschäftigen sollten – und Philosophen (wieder) mit Ökonomie / Why Economists should be more interested in Philosophy (again) – and why Philosophers should," ORDO. Jahrbuch für die Ordnung von Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft, De Gruyter, vol. 61(1), pages 75-94, January.
    9. Forte Francesco, 2018. "Röpke and Einaudi: from the Civitas of Persons to the Idea of Europe," Journal for Markets and Ethics, Sciendo, vol. 6(1), pages 1-10, June.
    10. Claire Baldin & Ludovic Ragni, 2015. "Théorie des élites parétienne et moment machiavélien comme principes explicatifs de la dynamique sociale : les limites de la méthode des approximations successives," GREDEG Working Papers 2015-19, Groupe de REcherche en Droit, Economie, Gestion (GREDEG CNRS), Université Côte d'Azur, France.
    11. Claire Baldin & Ludovic Ragni, 2014. "La rupture du moment machiavélien dans l’économie et la sociologie politique de Pareto : risque d’incohérence pour la méthode des approximations successives," Post-Print halshs-01241318, HAL.
    12. Silvestri, Paolo, 2012. "Il paradigma dell’imprenditore in una società liberale: tra prudenza e rischio-innovazione. Sulla parabola einaudiana del ‘Principe mercante’ [The paradigm of the entrepreneur in a liberal society,," MPRA Paper 59952, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2012.
    13. Silvestri, Paolo, 2012. "Il pareggio di bilancio: La testimonianza di Luigi Einaudi: tra predica e libertà [Balanced budget: Luigi Einaudi's testimony: between preaching and freedom]," MPRA Paper 59550, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 2011.
    14. John B. Davis & D. Wade Hands, 2011. "Introduction: The Changing Character of Economic Methodology," Chapters, in: John B. Davis & D. Wade Hands (ed.), The Elgar Companion to Recent Economic Methodology, chapter 1, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    15. Antoinette Baujard, 2016. "Utilitarianism and anti-utilitarianism," Chapters, in: Gilbert Faccarello & Heinz D. Kurz (ed.), Handbook on the History of Economic Analysis Volume III, chapter 40, pages 576-588, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    16. Bogusław Czarny, 2011. "The Debate on the Nature of Welfare Economics in the Contemporary Methodology of Economics," Ekonomia journal, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw, vol. 27.
    17. Mornati Fiorenzo, 2002. "L'économie pure de Pareto avant la théorie du choix: l'épistémologie et l'analytique de la théorie de l'utilité," CESMEP Working Papers 200211, University of Turin.
    18. Amedeo Fossati & Marcello Montefiori, 2016. "Antonio De Viti de Marco, political competition, and the principle of minimum means," Working papers 49, Società Italiana di Economia Pubblica.
    19. Bogusław Czarny, 2011. "Chaos in Basics of Economics (About Ambiguity of the Terms "Positive Economics" and "Normative Economics")," Ekonomia journal, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw, vol. 25.
    20. Michael McLure, 2005. "Economics in Relation to Sociology: Dualisms and Vilfredo Pareto's Pluralistic Methodology," Economics Discussion / Working Papers 05-21, The University of Western Australia, Department of Economics.

    More about this item

    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:uto:cesmep:201701. 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: . General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cmtorit.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 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: Piero Cavaleri or Marina Grazioli (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cmtorit.html .

    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.