Pub Date : 2023-01-02DOI: 10.1080/1350178X.2023.2170859
J. Pearl
ABSTRACT This note aims to assist applied econometricians in understanding the tools of causal inference and to extend those discussed in Nick Huntington-Klein's review of The Book of Why.
本文旨在帮助应用计量经济学家理解因果推理的工具，并扩展尼克·亨廷顿-克莱因(Nick Huntington-Klein)对《为什么》(the Book of Why)的评论中讨论的工具。
{"title":"Comments on Nick Huntington–Klein's review ‘Pearl before economists: The Book of Why and empirical economics’","authors":"J. Pearl","doi":"10.1080/1350178X.2023.2170859","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1350178X.2023.2170859","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This note aims to assist applied econometricians in understanding the tools of causal inference and to extend those discussed in Nick Huntington-Klein's review of The Book of Why.","PeriodicalId":46507,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Economic Methodology","volume":"123 1","pages":"63 - 67"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2023-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80703164","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-02DOI: 10.1080/1350178X.2023.2172447
Alexander Mebius
ABSTRACT Financial modelling is an essential tool for studying the possibility of financial transactions. This paper argues that financial models are conventional tools widely used in formulating and establishing possibility claims about a prospective investment transaction, from a set of governing possibility assumptions. What is distinctive about financial models is that they articulate how a transaction possibly could occur in a non-actual investment scenario given a limited base of possibility conditions assumed in the model. For this reason, it is argued that the epistemic contribution of financial models is that of enabling the model users to envision exactly how a prospective investment could be achieved in various ways through a detailed understanding of the available transaction mechanisms. Thus, financial models provide information about the possibility of an investment scenario by showing how a specific transaction mechanism could result from a small set of initial possibility conditions assumed in the model.
{"title":"On the epistemic contribution of financial models","authors":"Alexander Mebius","doi":"10.1080/1350178X.2023.2172447","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1350178X.2023.2172447","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Financial modelling is an essential tool for studying the possibility of financial transactions. This paper argues that financial models are conventional tools widely used in formulating and establishing possibility claims about a prospective investment transaction, from a set of governing possibility assumptions. What is distinctive about financial models is that they articulate how a transaction possibly could occur in a non-actual investment scenario given a limited base of possibility conditions assumed in the model. For this reason, it is argued that the epistemic contribution of financial models is that of enabling the model users to envision exactly how a prospective investment could be achieved in various ways through a detailed understanding of the available transaction mechanisms. Thus, financial models provide information about the possibility of an investment scenario by showing how a specific transaction mechanism could result from a small set of initial possibility conditions assumed in the model.","PeriodicalId":46507,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Economic Methodology","volume":"33 1","pages":"49 - 62"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2023-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"87192772","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-02DOI: 10.1080/1350178X.2023.2167228
Shiri Cohen Kaminitz
ABSTRACT What is the significance of GDP per capita to a society? What does it represent conceptually? These questions have been addressed in past decades, engendering extensive explorations of the limitations of the indicator, yet answers have proved problematic or partial. The paper presents the main conclusions so far drawn and builds upon them to present a new reading of the significance of GDP per capita. At the heart of this reading is the view that, while GDP per capita is not indicative of the welfare of individuals, it is indicative of an irreducible ‘group well-being.’ This view, however, requires one to relinquish the belief that only individuals can be ‘well.’ It turns out that the allegedly orthodox view, which sees GDP as a human-centered indicator, requires an unorthodox philosophical standpoint, one that accepts an irreducible group well-being. The paper presents this alternative interpretation and addresses its upsides and limitations.
{"title":"The significance of GDP: a new take on a century-old question","authors":"Shiri Cohen Kaminitz","doi":"10.1080/1350178X.2023.2167228","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1350178X.2023.2167228","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT What is the significance of GDP per capita to a society? What does it represent conceptually? These questions have been addressed in past decades, engendering extensive explorations of the limitations of the indicator, yet answers have proved problematic or partial. The paper presents the main conclusions so far drawn and builds upon them to present a new reading of the significance of GDP per capita. At the heart of this reading is the view that, while GDP per capita is not indicative of the welfare of individuals, it is indicative of an irreducible ‘group well-being.’ This view, however, requires one to relinquish the belief that only individuals can be ‘well.’ It turns out that the allegedly orthodox view, which sees GDP as a human-centered indicator, requires an unorthodox philosophical standpoint, one that accepts an irreducible group well-being. The paper presents this alternative interpretation and addresses its upsides and limitations.","PeriodicalId":46507,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Economic Methodology","volume":"28 1","pages":"1 - 14"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2023-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84288258","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-12-28DOI: 10.1080/1350178X.2022.2160003
P. Silvestri, Benoît Walraevens
ABSTRACT Among the various attempts to re-humanize economics, the ‘humanomics’ proposed by Vernon Smith and Bart Wilson stands out. We contribute to the “humanomics project” by mapping its territory – core, periphery and frontiers – with an eye, also, on future explorations. First, we critically study the core: Smith and Wilson’s interpretation and experimental application of Adam Smith’s ideas on beneficence and injustice. Using the distinction between reciprocal cooperation and reciprocal kindness, we provide a different interpretation of Smith which helps to better understand the difference between exchange and trust, based on mutual advantage, and (reciprocal) beneficence proper. Secondly, we turn to the periphery, going beyond the ‘dichotomous representation of the human personality’ – personal-social/impersonal-economic – and showing other possible worlds: nuances of humans equally worthy of study, such as the personal-economic and the impersonal-social. Thirdly, we argue that the humanomics project should keep its frontiers as open as possible to human diversities and frailties.
{"title":"The wealth of humans: core, periphery and frontiers of humanomics","authors":"P. Silvestri, Benoît Walraevens","doi":"10.1080/1350178X.2022.2160003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1350178X.2022.2160003","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Among the various attempts to re-humanize economics, the ‘humanomics’ proposed by Vernon Smith and Bart Wilson stands out. We contribute to the “humanomics project” by mapping its territory – core, periphery and frontiers – with an eye, also, on future explorations. First, we critically study the core: Smith and Wilson’s interpretation and experimental application of Adam Smith’s ideas on beneficence and injustice. Using the distinction between reciprocal cooperation and reciprocal kindness, we provide a different interpretation of Smith which helps to better understand the difference between exchange and trust, based on mutual advantage, and (reciprocal) beneficence proper. Secondly, we turn to the periphery, going beyond the ‘dichotomous representation of the human personality’ – personal-social/impersonal-economic – and showing other possible worlds: nuances of humans equally worthy of study, such as the personal-economic and the impersonal-social. Thirdly, we argue that the humanomics project should keep its frontiers as open as possible to human diversities and frailties.","PeriodicalId":46507,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Economic Methodology","volume":"44 1","pages":"15 - 33"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2022-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74147892","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-11-21DOI: 10.1080/1350178X.2022.2147980
Sergios Tzotzes, D. Milonakis
ABSTRACT Considering Kuhn’s emphasis on the community structure of science, this paper focuses on the scientific community to inquire whether the recent global financial crisis ushered paradigm change in economics. To appraise the nature and the extent of post-crisis change, we examine the methodological constitution of the dominant paradigm identified as New Consensus Macroeconomics, methodological commitments binding paradigm and scientific community, and assess the practice of the community, particularly the treatment of anomalies. Subsequently, an attempt is made to illuminate whether/how sociological and institutional parameters in the community structure of the discipline bear upon prospects of change. Empirically, this research investigates, categorizes and evaluates post-crisis responses and perceptions of the scientific community. The overarching aim is to determine whether economics responded to a major anomaly with critical self-reflection on the adequacy of its methodological toolbox, leading to theory change, and to shed light on institutional aspects influence this process.
{"title":"Scientific communities, recent crisis and change in economics: a Kuhnian perspective","authors":"Sergios Tzotzes, D. Milonakis","doi":"10.1080/1350178X.2022.2147980","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1350178X.2022.2147980","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Considering Kuhn’s emphasis on the community structure of science, this paper focuses on the scientific community to inquire whether the recent global financial crisis ushered paradigm change in economics. To appraise the nature and the extent of post-crisis change, we examine the methodological constitution of the dominant paradigm identified as New Consensus Macroeconomics, methodological commitments binding paradigm and scientific community, and assess the practice of the community, particularly the treatment of anomalies. Subsequently, an attempt is made to illuminate whether/how sociological and institutional parameters in the community structure of the discipline bear upon prospects of change. Empirically, this research investigates, categorizes and evaluates post-crisis responses and perceptions of the scientific community. The overarching aim is to determine whether economics responded to a major anomaly with critical self-reflection on the adequacy of its methodological toolbox, leading to theory change, and to shed light on institutional aspects influence this process.","PeriodicalId":46507,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Economic Methodology","volume":"3 8 1","pages":"34 - 48"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2022-11-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86564034","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-11-14DOI: 10.1080/1350178x.2022.2142270
I. Gilboa, Andrew Postlewaite, L. Samuelson, D. Schmeidler
The interpretation of economic theories varies along several dimensions. First, theories can describe reality, illustrate a recommended state of affairs, or analyze the logical consistency of a possible world. Second, theories can be used for prediction or for explanation. Third, theories can relate to reality in a rule-based or case-based manner. Fourth, theories can be statements about economic reality or about the act of economic reasoning itself. Fifth, theories can offer predictions or merely critique reasoning. We argue that theories are often open to multiple interpretations which can shift depending on the context in which the theory is applied, the surrounding economic literature, and the argument made by the interpreter
{"title":"Economic theories and their Dueling interpretations","authors":"I. Gilboa, Andrew Postlewaite, L. Samuelson, D. Schmeidler","doi":"10.1080/1350178x.2022.2142270","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1350178x.2022.2142270","url":null,"abstract":"The interpretation of economic theories varies along several dimensions. First, theories can describe reality, illustrate a recommended state of affairs, or analyze the logical consistency of a possible world. Second, theories can be used for prediction or for explanation. Third, theories can relate to reality in a rule-based or case-based manner. Fourth, theories can be statements about economic reality or about the act of economic reasoning itself. Fifth, theories can offer predictions or merely critique reasoning. We argue that theories are often open to multiple interpretations which can shift depending on the context in which the theory is applied, the surrounding economic literature, and the argument made by the interpreter","PeriodicalId":46507,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Economic Methodology","volume":"7 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2022-11-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"72862235","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-11-04DOI: 10.1080/1350178X.2022.2141324
Caterina Marchionni
{"title":"What is useful philosophy of economics?","authors":"Caterina Marchionni","doi":"10.1080/1350178X.2022.2141324","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1350178X.2022.2141324","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":46507,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Economic Methodology","volume":"194 1","pages":"68 - 70"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2022-11-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"75882996","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-10-10DOI: 10.1080/1350178x.2022.2129736
G. Hersch
It is an open question whether well-being ought to primarily be understood as a temporal concept or whether it only makes sense to talk about a person’s well-being over their whole lifetime. In this article, I argue that how this principled philosophical disagreement is settled does not have substantive practical implications for well-being science and well-being policy. Trying to measure lifetime well-being directly is extremely challenging as well as unhelpful for guiding well-being public policy, while temporal well-being is both an adequate indirect measure of lifetime well-being, and an adequate focus for the purposes of improving well-being through public policy. Consequently, even if what we ought to care about is lifetime well-being, we should use temporal measures of well-being and focus on temporal well-being policies.
{"title":"The usefulness of well-being temporalism","authors":"G. Hersch","doi":"10.1080/1350178x.2022.2129736","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1350178x.2022.2129736","url":null,"abstract":"It is an open question whether well-being ought to primarily be understood as a temporal concept or whether it only makes sense to talk about a person’s well-being over their whole lifetime. In this article, I argue that how this principled philosophical disagreement is settled does not have substantive practical implications for well-being science and well-being policy. Trying to measure lifetime well-being directly is extremely challenging as well as unhelpful for guiding well-being public policy, while temporal well-being is both an adequate indirect measure of lifetime well-being, and an adequate focus for the purposes of improving well-being through public policy. Consequently, even if what we ought to care about is lifetime well-being, we should use temporal measures of well-being and focus on temporal well-being policies.","PeriodicalId":46507,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Economic Methodology","volume":"49 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2022-10-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86465511","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-10-02DOI: 10.1080/1350178X.2022.2129734
D. Russell
ABSTRACT Idealizations help us understand the world by simplifying it. When factors make discrete contributions to an outcome, leaving factors out can make it easier to identify the contributions of factors that remain. But typically in economics, factors are not discrete but interact; how can isolating some factor X from some factor Y help us understand a reality in which X’s contribution depends on what Y contributes? I argue that Ronald Coase’s method in ‘The Problem of Social Cost’ illustrates how idealization can aid our understanding of a world in which factor Y (transaction costs) has an effect on factor X (transactions), by making plain precisely that effect, and so making it easier to see features of the actual world that obtain because of that effect. ‘Coasean’ idealization is therefore especially useful for understanding targets in which factors are not discrete but interact, as is so often the case in economics.
理想化通过简化帮助我们理解世界。当因素对结果产生离散的贡献时，将因素排除在外可以更容易地确定剩余因素的贡献。但在经济学中，典型的因素不是离散的，而是相互作用的;把因素X从因素Y中分离出来怎么能帮助我们理解X的贡献取决于Y的贡献的现实呢?我认为，罗纳德·科斯(Ronald Coase)在《社会成本问题》(The Problem of Social Cost)中的方法说明了理想化是如何帮助我们理解一个因素Y(交易成本)对因素X(交易)产生影响的世界的，方法是精确地阐明这种影响，从而使我们更容易看到由于这种影响而获得的现实世界的特征。因此，“科斯”理想化对于理解目标特别有用，其中的因素不是离散的，而是相互作用的，就像经济学中经常出现的情况一样。
{"title":"Coasean idealization","authors":"D. Russell","doi":"10.1080/1350178X.2022.2129734","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1350178X.2022.2129734","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Idealizations help us understand the world by simplifying it. When factors make discrete contributions to an outcome, leaving factors out can make it easier to identify the contributions of factors that remain. But typically in economics, factors are not discrete but interact; how can isolating some factor X from some factor Y help us understand a reality in which X’s contribution depends on what Y contributes? I argue that Ronald Coase’s method in ‘The Problem of Social Cost’ illustrates how idealization can aid our understanding of a world in which factor Y (transaction costs) has an effect on factor X (transactions), by making plain precisely that effect, and so making it easier to see features of the actual world that obtain because of that effect. ‘Coasean’ idealization is therefore especially useful for understanding targets in which factors are not discrete but interact, as is so often the case in economics.","PeriodicalId":46507,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Economic Methodology","volume":"29 1","pages":"275 - 293"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2022-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83710934","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-10-02DOI: 10.1080/1350178X.2022.2145338
Erik W. Matson
ABSTRACT This essay uses concepts from Adam Smith’s The Theory of Moral Sentiments to develop ideas about choice and welfare. I use those ideas to offer several challenges to common approaches to behavioral welfare economics and new paternalist policy making. Drawing on Smith’s dialectical concept of practical reason, which he develops in expositing ideas about self-awareness and self-judgment, I first argue that inconsistency need not be viewed as pathological. Inconsistent choices might indicate legitimate context-dependencies as individuals reflect over disjointed perspectives and act accordingly. Understanding inconsistency as reasonable raises epistemic difficulties for identifying errant choices and designing corrective policies. Second, I draw on Smith’s theory of the impartial spectator to discuss dynamic aspects of welfare. Welfare is not simply a matter of preference satisfaction but involves a sense of progress and improvement towards better preferences. Smith’s account suggests that economists interested in welfare should focus on institutional arrangements that facilitate self-development.
{"title":"Our dynamic being within: Smithian challenges to the new paternalism","authors":"Erik W. Matson","doi":"10.1080/1350178X.2022.2145338","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1350178X.2022.2145338","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This essay uses concepts from Adam Smith’s The Theory of Moral Sentiments to develop ideas about choice and welfare. I use those ideas to offer several challenges to common approaches to behavioral welfare economics and new paternalist policy making. Drawing on Smith’s dialectical concept of practical reason, which he develops in expositing ideas about self-awareness and self-judgment, I first argue that inconsistency need not be viewed as pathological. Inconsistent choices might indicate legitimate context-dependencies as individuals reflect over disjointed perspectives and act accordingly. Understanding inconsistency as reasonable raises epistemic difficulties for identifying errant choices and designing corrective policies. Second, I draw on Smith’s theory of the impartial spectator to discuss dynamic aspects of welfare. Welfare is not simply a matter of preference satisfaction but involves a sense of progress and improvement towards better preferences. Smith’s account suggests that economists interested in welfare should focus on institutional arrangements that facilitate self-development.","PeriodicalId":46507,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Economic Methodology","volume":"69 1","pages":"309 - 325"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2022-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89790254","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：