Did F.A. Hayek Embrace Popperian Falsificationism ? A Critical Comment About Certain Theses of Popper, Duhem and Austrian Methodology
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.52195/pm.v4i1.331Abstract
The author of this article argues that Hayek´s methodological outlook at the time he engaged in business cycle research was actually closer to praxeological apriorism than to Popperian falsificationism. A consideration of the Duhem thesis highlights the fact that even from a mainstream methodological perspective falsificationism is more problematic than is often realized. Even if the praxeological and mainstream lines of argumentation reject the Popperian emphasis on falsification for different reasons and from a different background, the prospects for falsificationism in economic methodology seem rather bleak.
Key words: General methodology; Austrian methodology; falsificationism; Popper; Hayek; Duhem; Duhemian Argument; testing of Theories; meaning and Interpretation of econometric results; correlation and causality.
JEL Classification: B20, C10, B23, A12, E32, B53, B40
Resumen: La perspectiva metodológica de Hayek a la hora de investigar el ciclo comercial se acercaba más al apriorismo praxeológico que al falsacionismo popperiano. Una consideración de la tesis de Duhem destaca el hecho de que, incluso desde una perspectiva metodológica común, el falsacionismo es más problemático de lo que se suele pensar. A pesar de que las líneas de argumentación praxeológicas rechazan el énfasis popperiano en la falsación por distintos motivos y desde un fondo distinto, las perspectivas del falsacionismo en la metodología económica no parecen ser nada prometedoras.
Palabras clave: metodología general; metodología austriaca; falsacionismo; Popper; Hayek; Duhem; argumento duhemiano; prueba de teorías; significado e interpretación de resultados econométricos; correlación y causalidad.
References
BLAUG, M. (1992), The Methodology of Economics: Or How Economists Explain, 2nd edition, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
BOETTKE, P. J. ‘Von Mises, Ludwig’, in: The Handbook of Economic Methodology, Davis J. B., Wade Hands D. and Uskali Mäki (eds.), Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 534-539.
BOLAND, L. A. (1998) ‘Understanding the Popperian Legacy in Economics’, downloaded version.
COX, R. T. (1961), The Algebra of Probable Inference, Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press.
CROSS, R. (1982), ‘The Duhem-Quine Thesis, Lakatos and the Appraisal of Theories in Macroeconomics’, The Economic Journal, 92 (June), 320-40.
DORLING, J. (1979), ‘Bayesian Personalism, the Methodology of Research Programmes, and Duhem’s Problem’, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, vol. 10, 177-187;
DUHEM, P. ([1914] 1991), The Aim and Structure of Physical Theory, Princeton: Princeton University Press. Eichengreen, B. and Mitchener, K. (2003), ‘The Great Depression as a credit boom gone wrong’, BIS Working Papers No. 137, 81 pp.
GARRISON, R.W. (2001), Time and Money-The Macroeconomics of Capital Structure, London: Routledge.
GARRETT, A. J. M. (1989), ‘Probability, Philosophy and Science: a briefing for Bayesians’, in Skilling, J. (ed.) Maximum Entropy and Bayesian Methods, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 107-116.
GILLIES, D. (1990), ‘Bayesianism versus Falsificationism. Review of Howson and Urbach 1989’, Ratio (New Series) III (1), 82-98.
GILLIES, D. (1995), ‘Popper’s Contribution to the Philosophy of Probability’, in: O’Hear A., Karl Popper: Philosophy and Problems, Cambridge University Press, 103- 120.
HAMMOND, J.D. (1992), ‘An Interview with Milton Friedman on Methodology’, Research in the History of Economic Thought and Methodology, 10, pp. 91-118.
HAMMOND, J.D. (1996). Theory and measurement - Causality issues in Milton Friedman’s monetary economics, Cambridge University Press.
HAUSMAN, D.M. (1992a), The inexact and separate science of economics, New York: Cambridge University Press.
HAUSMAN, D.M. (1992b), Essays on philosophy and economic methodology, Cambridge University Press.
HAYASHI, F. (2000), Econometrics, Princeton University Press.
HAYEK, F.A. ([1933] 1966), Monetary Theory and the Trade Cycle, New York: Augustus M. Kelley.
HAYEK, F.A. [1935] 1967), Prices and Production, 2nd edn (revised and enlarged), New York: Augustus M. Kelly.
HENNECKE, H.J. (2000), Friedrich August von Hayek-Die Tradition der Freiheit, Düsseldorf: Verlagsgruppe Handelsblatt GmbH.
HICKS, J. (1979), Causality in economics, New York: Basic Books.
HOOVER, K. D. (1995), ‘In Defense of Data Mining: Some Preliminary Thoughts’, in: Monetarism and the Methodology of Economics, Hoover K. and Sheffrin S. M. (eds.), Aldershot: Edward Elgar, 242-257.
HOOVER, K.D. (2005), ‘The Methodology of Econometrics’, prepared for the Palgrave Handbooks of Econometrics, volume 1: Theoretical Econometrics, downloaded version.
HOPPE, H.-H. (1995), Economic Science and the Austrian Method, Auburn: Ludwig von Mises Institute.
HOPPE, H.-H. (2006), ‘Is Research Based on Causal Scientific Principles Possible in the Social Sciences’, in: The Economics and Ethics of Private Property, Auburn: Ludwig von Mises Institute.
HOWSON, C. and P. Urbach (1989), Scientific Reasoning: The Bayesian Approach, Open Court.
HUERTA DE SOTO, J. (1998), ‘The Ongoing Methodenstreit of the Austrian School’, Journal des Economistes et des Etudes Humaines, Vol. 8, No. 1, 75-113.
JAYNES, E.T. (2003), Probability Theory - The Logic of Science, Cam-bridge: Cambridge University Press.
JEFFREY, R. (2004), Subjective Probability - The Real Thing, Cambridge University Press.
KEUZENKAMP, H.A. and J.R. MAGNUS (1995), ‘On Tests and Significance in Economics,’ Journal of Econometrics 67 (1), 5-24.
KEUZENKAMP, H. A. (2000), Probability, Econometrics and Truth-The methodology of econometrics, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
KLANT, J.J. (1984), The rules of the game - The logical structure of economic theories, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
LAKATOS, I. (1978), The methodology of scientific research programmes, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
MISES, L. von (1998), Human Action, Auburn: The Ludwig von Mises Institute.
MISES, L. von (1981), The Theory of Money and Credit, Indianapolis: LibertyClassics.
POPPER, K.R. ([1957] 1994), The Poverty of Historicism, London: Routledge.
POPPER, K.R. ([1959] 1980), The Logic of Scientific Discovery, London: Hutchinson.
POPPER, K.R. ([1963] 2002), Conjectures and Refutations, London: Routledge.
POPPER, K.R. (1983), Realism and the Aim of Science, London: Hutchinson.
QUINE, W. V. O. ([1953] 1980), From a Logical Point of View, London: Harvard University Press.
ROTHBARD, M.N. ([1963] 1975), America’s Great Depression, Kansas City: Sheed and Ward, Inc.
ROTHBARD, M.N. (1979), Individualism and the Philosophy of the Social Sciences, Cato Paper No. 4, San Francisco: Cato Institute.
ROTHBARD, M.N. (1997), The Logic of Action I: Method, Money, and the Austrian School, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
SMITH, B. (1996), ‘In Defense of Extreme (Fallibilistic) Apriorism’, Journal of Libertarian Studies, 12:1, 179- 192.
SUMMERS, L. H. (1991), ‘The Scientific Illusion in Empirical Macroeconomics,’ Scandinavian Journal of Economics 93(2), 129-48.
