Advertisement

Carl Menger and the Later Austrian School of Economics: An Analysis of their Methodological Relationship

  • Tsutomu Hashimoto

Abstract

Would it be a normative imperative that the methodology of social science should be neutral in respect to any ideological value? Or would it be an illusion that the methodology is exclusively useful for scientific procedures?

Keywords

Austrian Economic Austrian School Exact Theory Exact Approach Spontaneous Order 
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. Alter, M. (1990a) Carl Menger and the Origins of Austrian Economics, Oxford: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  2. Alter, M. (1990b) ‘What do we know about Menger?’, in Caldwell (ed.) (1990).Google Scholar
  3. Böhm, S. (1985) ‘The political solution to a fundamental problem in Menger’s methodology and beyond’, in Caldwell (ed.) (1990).Google Scholar
  4. Caldwell, B.J. (ed.) (1990) Carl Menger and His Legacy in Economics, Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Grassl, W. and Smith, B. (eds) (1986) Austrian Economics: Historical and Philosophical Background, London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
  6. Hashimoto, T. (1991) ‘Hayek’s labyrinth: on his methodological transformations’, Gendai-shiso, 19(12) (in Japanese).Google Scholar
  7. Hashimoto, T. (1994) Logic of Liberty: Mises, Popper and Hayek,Tokyo:Sobunsha (in Japanese).Google Scholar
  8. Hayek, F. A. (1934) ‘Carl Menger’, in The Collected Works of Carl Menger (1871–1915), 4 volumes with an Introduction by F.A. Hayek, London: The London School of Economics and Political Science, 1934–1936.Google Scholar
  9. Hayek, F. A. (1952) The Counter-Revolution of Science: Studies on the Abuse of Reason, Glencoe: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  10. Hayek, F. A. (1973) ‘The Place of Menger’s Grundsätze in the History of Economic Thought’, in Hicks and Weber (eds) (1973).Google Scholar
  11. Hicks, J. R. and Weber, W., (eds) (1973) Carl Menger and the Austrian School of Economics, Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  12. Hutchison, T. W. (1973) ‘Some Themes from Investigations into Method’, in Hicks and Weber (eds) (1973).Google Scholar
  13. Hutchison, T. W. (1981) The Politics and Philosophy of Economics: Marxians, Keynesians and Austrians, Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  14. Kauder, E. (1965) A History of Marginal Utility Theory,Princeton:Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Kaufmann, F. (1933) ‘On the subject-matter and method of economic science’, Economica, O.S., 42: 381–401.Google Scholar
  16. Kirzner, I. M. (1990) ‘Menger, Classical Liberalism, and the Austrian School of Economics’, in Caldwell (ed.) (1990).Google Scholar
  17. Menger, C. [1883] (1969) ‘Untersuchungen über die Methode der Sozialwissenschaften, und der politischen Ökonomie insbesondere’, in Gesammelte Werke, Band II, Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr.Google Scholar
  18. Menger, C. [1884] (1969) ‘Die Irrtümer des Historismus in der deutschen Nationalökonomie’, in Gesammelte Werke, Band II, Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr.Google Scholar
  19. Milford, K. (1990) ‘Menger’s methodology’, in Caldwell (ed.) (1990).Google Scholar
  20. Mises, L. von (1949) Human Action: A Treatise on Economics,New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Oppler, E. (1930) Der Begriffdes Wirtschaftsgesetzes in der Volkswirtschaftslehre: Eine problemgeschichtliche Untersuchung, Münster: Helios.Google Scholar
  22. Redman, D. A. (1991) Economics and the Philosophy of Science, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Rothbard, M. N. (1957) ‘In defense of extreme apriorism’, Southern Economic Journal, 23(3): 315–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Rothbard, M. N. (1976) ‘Praxeology: The method of Austrian Economics’, in E. G. Dolan (ed.) The Foundations of Austrian Economics, Kansas City: Sheed and Ward.Google Scholar
  25. Schmoller, G. von (1883) ‘Zur Methodologie der Staats-und Sozialwissenschaften’, Schmollers Jahrbuch für Gesetzgebung, Verwaltung und Volkswirtschaft, N.F., 7: 975–94.Google Scholar
  26. Schumpeter, J. A. (1914) Epochen der Dogmen-und Methodengeschichte: Grundriß der Sozialökonomik, 1. Aufl., Tübingen.Google Scholar
  27. Schumpeter, J. A. (1926) ‘Gustav v. Schmoller und die Probleme von Heute’, Schmollers Jahrbuch für Gesetzgebung, Verwaltungund Volkswirtschaft, 50: 337–88.Google Scholar
  28. Schumpeter, J. A. (1954) History of Economic Analysis, New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Shearmur, J. (1986) ‘The Austrian Connection: Hayek s Liberalism and the Thought of Carl Menger, in Grassl and Smith (eds) (1986).Google Scholar
  30. Shearmur, J. (1990) ‘From Hayek to Menger: Biology, Subjectivism and Welfare’, in Caldwell (ed.) (1990).Google Scholar
  31. Smith, B. (1986) ‘Austrian Economics and Austrian Philosophy, in Grassl and Smith (eds) (1986).Google Scholar
  32. Smith, B. (1990) ‘Aristotle, Menger, Mises: An essay in the metaphysics of economics, in Caldwell (ed. ) (1990).Google Scholar
  33. Streissler, E. W. (1990) ‘Carl Menger on economic policy: The Lectures to Crown Prince Rudolf, in Caldwell (ed.) (1990).Google Scholar
  34. Tamanoi, Y. (1975) ‘Menger versus Schmoller on methodological debate, in Tenkan-suru-keizaigaku, Tokyo: Tokyo University Press (in Japanese).Google Scholar
  35. Yoshida, S. (1986) ‘Translator’s introduction’, in Keizaigaku-no-Houhou,Tokyo: Nihon-hyouronsha, the Japanese translation of Menger (1883; 1884 =1986) (in Japanese).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Tsutomu Hashimoto 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tsutomu Hashimoto

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations