Advertisement

Hermeneutics, Subjectivity, and the Lester/Machlup Debate: Toward a More Anthropological Approach to Empirical Economics

Chapter
Part of the Recent Economic Thought Series book series (RETH, volume 21)

Abstract

What is the status of modern economics from a hermeneutical standpoint?1 Since hermeneutics is essentially a philosophy of understanding, a philosophy that shows us what understanding is, how it happens, and what it depends on, this question can be rephrased: How well do economists understand understanding? What difference would it make to our scholarly practices if economics were to become more hermeneutically sophisticated in this respect?

Keywords

American Economic Review Austrian Economic Business People Neoclassical Economic Everyday World 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Albert, Hans. 1988. “Hermeneutics and Economics: A Criticism of Hermeneutical Thinking in the Social Sciences.” KYKLOS 41: 573–602.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bernstein, Richard J. 1983. Beyond Objectivism and Relativism: Science, Hermeneutics, and Praxis. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
  3. Buchanan, James M. 1969. Cost and Choice. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  4. Buchanan, James M. and Thirlby, G.F. 1973. L.S.E Essays on Cost. New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Ebeling, Richard M. 1986. “Toward a Hermeneutical Economics: Expectations, Prices, and the Role of Interpretation in a Theory of the Market Process.” In Kirzner, 1986b, pp. 39–55.Google Scholar
  6. Ermarth, Michael. 1978. Wilhelm Dilthey: The Critique of Historical Reason. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  7. Gadamer, Hans-George. 1976. Philosophical Hermeneutics. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  8. Gadamer, Hans-George. 1984. Truth and Method. New York: Crossroad.Google Scholar
  9. Hands, D. Wade. 1987. “Charles Taylor’s Human Agency and Language: Philosophical Papers I and Philosophy and the Human Sciences: Philosophical Papers II.” Economics and Philosophy 3: 172–175.Google Scholar
  10. Kirzner, Israel M. 1986a. “Another Look at the Subjectivism of Costs” In Kirzner, 1986b, pp. 140–156.Google Scholar
  11. Kirzner, Israel M. ed. 1986b. Subjectivism, Intelligibility, and Economic Understanding: Essays in Honor of Ludwig M. Lachmann on his Eightieth Birthday. New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Lachmann, Ludwig M. 1986. “Economics as a Hermeneutical Discipline.” Paper presented at the conference on Interpretation, Human Agency, and Economics, March 28, 1986, George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia.Google Scholar
  13. Lavoie, Don. 1986. “Euclideanism vs. Hermeneutics: A Reinterpretation of Misesian Apriorism.” In Kirzner, 1986b, pp. 192–210.Google Scholar
  14. Lavoie, Don. 1987. “The Accounting of Interpretations and the Interpretation of Accounts: The Communicative Function of `The Language of Business’.” Accounting, Organizations and Society 12: 579–604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Leamer, Edward E. 1983. “Let’s Take the Con Out of Econometrics.” American Economic Review 73 (March): 460–472.Google Scholar
  16. Lester, Richard A. 1946. “Shortcomings of Marginal Analysis for WageEmployment Problems.” American Economic Review 36 (March): 63–82.Google Scholar
  17. Lester, Richard A. 1947. “Marginalism, Minimum Wages, and Labor Markets.” American Economic Review 37 (March): 135–148.Google Scholar
  18. Linge, David E. 1976. “Editor’s Introduction.” In Hans-Georg Gadamer Philosophical Hermeneutics. Berkeley:University of California Press.Google Scholar
  19. Machlup, Fritz. 1939. “Evaluation of the Practical Significance of the Theory of Monopolistic Competition.” American Economic Review 29.Google Scholar
  20. Machlup, Fritz. 1946. “Marginal Analysis and Empirical Research.” American Economic Review 36 (Sept.): 519–554.Google Scholar
  21. Machlup, Fritz. 1947. “Rejoinder to an Anti-marginalist.” American Economic Review 37 (March): 148–154.Google Scholar
  22. Machlup, Fritz. 1955. “The Problem of Verification in Economics.” The Southern Economic Journal 22: 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Madison, G.B. 1986. “Hans-Georg Gadamer’s Contribution to Philosophy and Its Significance for Economics.” Paper presented at the conference on Interpretation, Human Agency, and Economics, March 28, 1986, George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia.Google Scholar
  24. Madison, G.B. 1988. “How Individualistic is Methodological Individualism?” Working paper #8806 of the Groupe de Recherche en Epistemologie Comparee, University of Quebec at Montreal.Google Scholar
  25. McCloskey, Donald N. 1985. The Rhetoric of Economics. Madison: University of Wiscons in Press.Google Scholar
  26. Mirowski, Philip. 1984. “Physics and the Marginalist Revolution.” Cambridge Journal of Economics 8: 361–379.Google Scholar
  27. Mirowski, Philip. 1986a. “Shall I compare These to a Minkowski-Ricardo-Leontief-Metzler Matrix of the Mosak-Hicks Type? Or, Rhetoric, Mathematics, and the Nature of Neoclassical Economic Theory.” Paper presented at the conference on The Rhetoric of Economics April 17–19, 1986. Wellesley College, Wellesley, Mass.Google Scholar
  28. Mirowski, Philip. 1986b. “Mathematical Formalism and Economic Explanation.” In PhilipGoogle Scholar
  29. Mirowski, ed. The Reconstruction of Economic Theory. Boston: KluwerNijhoff.Google Scholar
  30. Mueller-Vollmer, Kurt. 1985. The Hermeneutics Reader. New York: Continuum.Google Scholar
  31. Rabinow, Paul and Sullivan, W.M. 1979. Interpretive Social Science: A Reader. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  32. Rothbard, Murray N. 1988. “The Hermeneutical Invasion of Philosophy and Economics.” The Review of Austrian Economics 3: 45–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Schütz, Alfred. 1953. “Common-Sense and Scientific Interpretation of Human Action.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 14: 1–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Shackle, G.L.S 1972. Epistemics and Economics: A Critique of Economic Doctrines. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Warnke, Georgia. 1987. Gadamer: Hermeneutics, Tradition and Reason. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  36. Yeager, Leland. 1987. “Why Subjectivism?” Review of Austrian Economics 1: 531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Lawson, T. 1988. “Probability and Uncertainty in Economic Analysis.” Journal of Post Keynesian Economics 11 (1): 38–65.Google Scholar
  38. Lawson, T. 1989. “Realism and Instrumentalism in the Development of Econometrics.” Oxford Economic Papers 41 (1): 236–258.Google Scholar
  39. Mitchell, J.C. 1969. Social Networks in Urban Situations. Part I, Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1990

Authors and Affiliations

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations