Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-42gr6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-18T03:08:54.927Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

‘Model-Platonism’ in economics: on a classical epistemological critique

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 February 2013

JAKOB KAPELLER
JAKOB KAPELLER*
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy and Theory of Science, University of Linz, Altenbergerstraße 69, Linz, Austria
*
*Email: jakob.kapeller@jku.at
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Roughly 50 years ago, the eminent German philosopher and social scientist Hans Albert presented a critique of ‘Model-Platonism’ in economics to describe essential elements of the ‘neoclassical style of economic reasoning’. Specifically, Albert advanced a series of epistemological arguments to illustrate conceptual shortcomings in neoclassical theory, which may be utilized to immunize the latter against conflicting empirical evidence. This article summarizes Albert's main arguments and illustrates his most important insights by using simple propositional logic. Based on these findings, a clarification and definition of ‘Model-Platonism’ is offered and the applicability of the Model-Platonism-critique to current developments in mainstream economics is assessed. Finally, two possible extensions of Albert's argument, the concepts of oscillating informational content and axiomatic variation, are illustrated with respect to their potential for immunization against critique.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Institutional Economics , Volume 9 , Issue 2 , June 2013 , pp. 199 - 221
Copyright
Copyright © Millennium Economics Ltd 2013

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adorno, T. W., Albert, H., Dahrendorf, R., Habermas, J., Pilot, H., and Popper, K. R. (eds.) (1976), The Positivist Dispute in German Sociology, New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Albert, H. (1971[1963]), ‘Modell-Platonismus – Der neoklassische Stil des ökonomischen Denkens in kritischer Beleuchtung’, in Topitsch, E. (ed.), Logik der Sozialwissenschaften, Berlin: Kiepenheuer & Witsch, pp. 406–434.Google Scholar
Albert, H. (1972[1954]), Ökonomische Ideologie und Politische Theorie, 2nd edn, Göttingen: Schwartz & Co.Google Scholar
Albert, H. (1985), Treatise on Critical Reason, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Albert, H. (1998[1967]), Marktsoziologie und Entscheidungslogik, 2nd edn, Tübingen: Mohr.Google Scholar
Albert, H. (1999), Between Social Science, Religion and Politics: Essays on Critical Rationalism, Amsterdam: Rodopi.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Albert, H. (2012[1963]), ‘Model Platonism: Neoclassical Economic Thought in Critical Light’ (translated by Arnold, D. and Maier-Rigaud, F. P.), Journal of Institutional Economics, 8 (3): 295–323.Google Scholar
Albert, M. (1996), ‘“Unrealistische Annahmen” und empirische Prüfung – Methodologische Probleme der Ökonomie am Beispiel der Außenhandelstheorie, Zeitschrift für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften, 116, 451–486.Google Scholar
Amadae, S. M. (2003), Rationalizing Capitalist Democracy, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Archibald, G. C. (1963), ‘Discussion’, American Economic Review, 53 (2): 227–229.Google Scholar
Arnold, D. and Maier-Rigaud, F. P. (2012), ‘The Enduring Relevance of the Model Platonism Critique for Economics and Public Policy’, Journal of Institutional Economics, 8 (3): 289–294.Google Scholar
Backhouse, R. E. (2005), ‘The Rise of Free Market Economics: Economists and the Role of the State since 1970’, History of Political Economy, 27 (5): 355–392.Google Scholar
Becker, G. S. (1990[1976]), The Economic Approach to Human Behavior, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Binmore, K. and Shaked, A. (2010), ‘Experimental Economics: Where Next?’, Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 73 (1): 87–100.Google Scholar
Blinder, A. S. (1974), ‘The Economics of Brushing Teeth’, Journal of Political Economy, 82 (4): 887–891.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bouchaud, J.-P. (2008), ‘Economics Needs a Scientific Revolution’, Nature, 455: 1181.Google Scholar
Colander, D. (2000), ‘The Death of Neoclassical Economics’, Journal of the History of Economic Thought, 22 (2): 128–143.Google Scholar
Colander, D., Holt, R. P. and Rosser, J. B. (2004), ‘The Changing Face of Mainstream Economics’, Review of Political Economy, 16 (4): 485–499.Google Scholar
Croson, R. and Gächter, S. (2010), ‘The Science of Experimental Economics’, Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 73 (1): 122–131.Google Scholar
De Long, B. J., Shleifer, A., Summers, L. H. and Waldmann, R. J. (1990), ‘Positive Feedback Investment Strategies and Destabilizing Rational Speculation’, Journal of Finance, 45 (2): 379–395.Google Scholar
Dobusch, L. and Kapeller, J. (2009), ‘Why Is Economics Not an Evolutionary Science? New Answers to Veblen's Old Question’, Journal of Economic Issues, 43 (4): 867–898.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dobusch, L. and Kapeller, J. (2012), ‘Heterodox United vs. Mainstream City? Sketching a Framework for Interested Pluralism in Economics’, Journal of Economic Issues, 46 (4): 1035–1057.Google Scholar
Fehr, E. and Schmidt, K. M. (1999), ‘A Theory of Fairness, Competition and Cooperation’, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 114 (3): 817–868.Google Scholar
Frankfurter, G. M. and McGoun, E. G. (2002), ‘Resistance Is Futile. The Assimilation of Behavioural Finance’, Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 48 (4): 375–389.Google Scholar
Friedman, M. (1966[1953]), Essays in Positive Economics, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Gadenne, V. (1984), Theorie und Erfahrung in der Psychologischen Forschung, Tübingen: Mohr.Google Scholar
Gadenne, V. (1999), ‘Die Funktionen von Ceteris-paribus-Aussagen’, in Löffler, W. and Runggaldier, E. (eds.), Vielfalt und Konvergenz der Philosophie, Vienna: Hölder-Pichler-Tempsky, pp. 215–219.Google Scholar
Galbraith, J. K. (1967), The New Industrial State, Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
Garnett, R., Olsen, E. K. and Starr, M. (eds.) (2010), Economic Pluralism, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Gibbard, A. and Varian, H. R. (1978), ‘Economic Models’, Journal of Philosophy, 75 (11): 664–677.Google Scholar
Guala, F. (2006), ‘Has Game Theory Been Refuted?’ Journal of Philosophy, 103 (5): 239–263.Google Scholar
Güth, W. and Kliemt, H. (2003), ‘Experimentelle Ökonomik: Modell-Platonismus in Neuem Gewande?’ in Held, M., Kubon-Gilke, G. and Sturn, R. (eds.), Jahrbuch normative und institutionelle Grundfragen der Ökonomik 2: Experimente in der Ökonomik, Marburg, Germany: Metropolis, pp. 315–342.Google Scholar
Hart, O. D. and Kreps, D. M. (1986), ‘Price Destabilizing Speculation,’ Journal of Political Economy, 94 (5): 927–952.Google Scholar
Hausman, D. M. (1990), ‘Supply and Demand Explanations and Their Ceteris Paribus Clauses’, Review of Political Economy, 2 (2): 168–187.Google Scholar
Hausman, D. M. (1992), The Inexact and Separate Science of Economics, New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hayek, F. A. (1945), ‘The Use of Knowledge in Society’, American Economic Review, 35 (4): 519–530.Google Scholar
Hempel, C. G. (1970[1965]), Aspects of Scientific Explanation and Other Essays in the Philosophy of Science, New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Hicks, J. R. (1937), ‘Mr. Keynes and the Classics: A Suggested Interpretation’, Econometrica, 5 (2): 147–159.Google Scholar
Hodgson, G. M. (ed.) (2012), Mathematics and Modern Economics, Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Hutchison, T. W. (1965[1938]), Significance and Basic Postulates of Economic Theory, 2nd edn, New York: Augustus Kelley.Google Scholar
Kuhn, T. S. (1996[1962]), The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lakatos, I. (1978[1970]), ‘Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes’, in Lakatos, I., and Musgrave, A. (eds.), Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge, New York: Cambridge University Press, pp. 91–195.Google Scholar
Lawson, T. (2003), Reorienting Economics, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Lawson, T. (2012), ‘Mathematical Modelling and Ideology in the Economics Academy: Competing Explanations of the Failings of the Modern Discipline?’ Economic Thought, 1 (1): 3–22.Google Scholar
Lazear, E. P. (2000), ‘Economic Imperialism’, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 115 (1): 99–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leibenstein, H. (1950), ‘Bandwagon, Snob, and Veblen Effects in the Theory of Consumers’ Demand’, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 64 (2): 183–207.Google Scholar
Leijonhufvud, A. (1973), ‘Life Among the Econ’, Western Economic Journal, 11 (3): 327–337.Google Scholar
Markie, P. (2008[2004]), ‘Rationalism vs. Empiricism’, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, http://plato.stanford.edu (accessed 19 May 2010).Google Scholar
McCloskey, D. N. (1998[1985]), The Rhetoric of Economics, 2nd edn, Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
Modigliani, F. (1944), ‘Liquidity Preference and the Theory of Interest and Money’, Econometrica, 12 (1): 45–88.Google Scholar
Morgan, M. S. (2001), ‘Models, Stories and the Economic World’, Journal of Economic Methodology, 8 (3): 361–384.Google Scholar
Polanyi, K. (1957[1944]), The Great Transformation, Boston, MA: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
Popper, K. R. (2010[1959]), The Logic of Scientific Discovery, London, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
Robbins, L. (1945[1932]), An Essay on the Nature and Significance of Economic Science, 2nd extended edn, London, UK: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Rosenberg, A. (1976), Microeconomic Laws: A Philosophical Approach, Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rubinstein, A. (2006), ‘Dilemmas of an Economic Theorist’, Econometrica, 74 (4): 865–883.Google Scholar
Searle, J. R. (2005), ‘What Is an Institution?’, Journal of Institutional Economics, 1 (1): 1–22.Google Scholar
Stiglitz, J. E. (2000), ‘The Contributions of the Economics of Information to Twentieth Century Economics’, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 115 (4): 1441–1478.Google Scholar
Stiglitz, J. E. (2010), ‘An Agenda for Reforming Economic Theory’, Presentation at the 2010 INET Conference at Kings College Cambridge, http://ineteconomics.org/video/conference-kings/agenda-reforming-economic-theory-joseph-stiglitz (accessed 10 September 2012).Google Scholar
Sugden, R. (2000), ‘Credible Worlds: The Status of Theoretical Models in Economics’, Journal of Economic Methodology, 7 (1): 1–31.Google Scholar
Suppes, P. (1957), Introduction to Logic, Princeton, NJ: Nostrand.Google Scholar
Swedberg, R. (2005), ‘Markets in Society’, in Smelser, N. J. and Swedberg, R. (eds.), The Handbook of Economic Sociology, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, pp. 233–253.Google Scholar
Tokic, D. (2012), ‘When Hedging Fails: What Every CEO Should Know About Speculation’, Journal of Management Development, 31 (8): 801–807.Google Scholar
Veblen, T. B. (1994[1899]), The Theory of the Leisure Class, New York: Dover.Google Scholar