Friedman, Positive Economics, and the Chicago Boys

E. Schliesser
{"title":"Friedman, Positive Economics, and the Chicago Boys","authors":"E. Schliesser","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1142741","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In this paper I investigate two denials in Milton Friedman's Nobel Lecture (1976). The first is [i] the denial that 'Economics and its fellow social sciences' ought to be 'regarded more nearly as branches of philosophy.' The second is [ii] the denial that economics is 'enmeshed with values at the outset because they deal with human behaviour'. I show that Friedman's appeal to his methodology in the Nobel lecture fails on conceptual grounds internal to Friedman's methodology. Moreover, I show that the failure is related to a broader systematic problem: when properly understood, Friedman's methodology shows that positive economics is (in a non-trivial sense) enmeshed in values. In order to account for Friedman's overreaching, I turn to the charged social context regarding Friedman's purported involvement with the Chicago Boys, who were then serving Chilean Dictator Pinochet. I conclude by explaining why I re-open the old chestnut of values in positive science. The episode allows me to raise a question of fundamental import about the relationship between expertise and society.","PeriodicalId":399171,"journal":{"name":"Philosophy of Science eJournal","volume":"29 3 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2007-11-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"16","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Philosophy of Science eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1142741","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 16

Abstract

In this paper I investigate two denials in Milton Friedman's Nobel Lecture (1976). The first is [i] the denial that 'Economics and its fellow social sciences' ought to be 'regarded more nearly as branches of philosophy.' The second is [ii] the denial that economics is 'enmeshed with values at the outset because they deal with human behaviour'. I show that Friedman's appeal to his methodology in the Nobel lecture fails on conceptual grounds internal to Friedman's methodology. Moreover, I show that the failure is related to a broader systematic problem: when properly understood, Friedman's methodology shows that positive economics is (in a non-trivial sense) enmeshed in values. In order to account for Friedman's overreaching, I turn to the charged social context regarding Friedman's purported involvement with the Chicago Boys, who were then serving Chilean Dictator Pinochet. I conclude by explaining why I re-open the old chestnut of values in positive science. The episode allows me to raise a question of fundamental import about the relationship between expertise and society.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
弗里德曼,实证经济学和芝加哥男孩
在本文中,我调查了米尔顿·弗里德曼在诺贝尔演讲(1976)中的两个否认。第一种是否认“经济学及其社会科学同行”应该“更接近于被视为哲学的分支”。第二个是否认经济学“从一开始就与价值观纠缠在一起,因为它们处理的是人类行为”。我指出,弗里德曼在诺贝尔奖演讲中对其方法论的呼吁,在弗里德曼方法论内部的概念基础上是失败的。此外,我还指出,这种失败与一个更广泛的系统问题有关:如果得到适当理解,弗里德曼的方法论表明,实证经济学(在非微不足道的意义上)与价值观纠缠在一起。为了解释弗里德曼的越权行为,我转向了弗里德曼据称与芝加哥男孩(当时为智利独裁者皮诺切特服务)有关的充满争议的社会背景。最后,我解释了为什么我要重新打开实证科学中关于价值的老生常谈。这段插曲让我提出了一个关于专业知识与社会之间关系的重要问题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Theory of Imagination in Economic Games Menopause as a Regulatory Device for Matching the Demand for Children with Its Supply: A Hypothesis Adjustments and Compromises of Household Economy Approach in Burkina Faso On Joan Robinson’s Completely Successful Indoctrination of John Kenneth Galbraith: Turning a Potential Keynesian Into an Actual Robinsonian Expected Utility in 3D
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1