评价现代货币理论特有的货币本体论

IF 0.6 1区哲学 Q4 ETHICS Philosophy of the Social Sciences Pub Date : 2023-11-04 DOI:10.1177/00483931231210341

Brian Duricy, Maxwell G. Poitier

{"title":"评价现代货币理论特有的货币本体论","authors":"Brian Duricy, Maxwell G. Poitier","doi":"10.1177/00483931231210341","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Macroeconomic traditions disagree on the policies needed for the economy to properly function and how to assess them. In this paper, we contend that these disagreements originate from the social ontological commitments of a theory. The ontology of money underlines these disagreements between Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) and mainstream economics. First, we assess MMT’s ontology of money. Next, we identify MMT’s normative commitments and classify MMT’s ontology as a taxonomic definition with thick concepts. Finally, we offer reasons why MMT's ontology of money leads to rivalries with other economic traditions. We argue disagreements on policy are expected, given the ontological differences elaborated.","PeriodicalId":46776,"journal":{"name":"Philosophy of the Social Sciences","volume":"16 10","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessing Modern Monetary Theory’s Peculiar Ontology of Money\",\"authors\":\"Brian Duricy, Maxwell G. Poitier\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00483931231210341\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Macroeconomic traditions disagree on the policies needed for the economy to properly function and how to assess them. In this paper, we contend that these disagreements originate from the social ontological commitments of a theory. The ontology of money underlines these disagreements between Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) and mainstream economics. First, we assess MMT’s ontology of money. Next, we identify MMT’s normative commitments and classify MMT’s ontology as a taxonomic definition with thick concepts. Finally, we offer reasons why MMT's ontology of money leads to rivalries with other economic traditions. We argue disagreements on policy are expected, given the ontological differences elaborated.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46776,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Philosophy of the Social Sciences\",\"volume\":\"16 10\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Philosophy of the Social Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00483931231210341\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ETHICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Philosophy of the Social Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00483931231210341","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

宏观经济传统对于经济正常运行所需的政策以及如何评估这些政策存在分歧。在本文中，我们认为这些分歧源于一个理论的社会本体论承诺。货币本体论强调了现代货币理论(MMT)与主流经济学之间的分歧。首先，我们评估了MMT的货币本体论。接下来，我们确定了MMT的规范性承诺，并将MMT的本体分类为具有厚概念的分类定义。最后，我们提供了为什么MMT的货币本体论导致与其他经济传统竞争的原因。我们认为，考虑到所阐述的本体论差异，在政策上的分歧是意料之中的。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

Assessing Modern Monetary Theory’s Peculiar Ontology of Money

Macroeconomic traditions disagree on the policies needed for the economy to properly function and how to assess them. In this paper, we contend that these disagreements originate from the social ontological commitments of a theory. The ontology of money underlines these disagreements between Modern Monetary Theory (MMT) and mainstream economics. First, we assess MMT’s ontology of money. Next, we identify MMT’s normative commitments and classify MMT’s ontology as a taxonomic definition with thick concepts. Finally, we offer reasons why MMT's ontology of money leads to rivalries with other economic traditions. We argue disagreements on policy are expected, given the ontological differences elaborated.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Philosophy of the Social Sciences Multiple-

CiteScore

2.10

自引率

0.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： For more than four decades Philosophy of the Social Sciences has served as the international, interdisciplinary forum for current research, theory and debate on the philosophical foundations of the social services. Philosophy of the Social Sciences focuses on the central issues of the social sciences, including general methodology (explaining, theorizing, testing) the application of philosophy (especially individualism versus holism), the nature of rationality and the history of theories and concepts. Among the topics you''ll explore are: ethnomethodology, evolution, Marxism, phenomenology, postmodernism, rationality, relativism, scientific methods, and textual interpretations. Philosophy of the Social Sciences'' open editorial policy ensures that you''ll enjoy rigorous scholarship on topics viewed from many different-- and often conflicting-- schools of thought. No school, party or style of philosophy of the social sciences is favoured. Debate between schools is encouraged. Each issue presents submissions by distinguished scholars from a variety of fields, including: anthropology, communications, economics, history, linguistics, philosophy, psychology, and sociology. Each issue brings you in-depth discussions, symposia, literature surveys, translations, and review symposia of interest both to philosophyers concerned with the social sciences and to social scientists concerned with the philosophical foundations of their subjects.