“Philosophy and economics”的意思、由来-开放百科全书

Philosophy and economics, also philosophy of economics, studies topics such as rational choice, the appraisal of economic outcomes, institutions and processes, and the ontology of economic phenomena and the possibilities of acquiring knowledge of them.

It is useful to divide philosophy of economics in this way into three subject matters which can be regarded respectively as branches of action theory, ethics (or normative social and political philosophy), and philosophy of science. Economic theories of rationality, welfare, and social choice defend substantive philosophical theses often informed by relevant philosophical literature and of evident interest to those interested in action theory, philosophical psychology, and social and political philosophy.

Scope

Definition and ontology of economics

The question usually addressed in any subfield of philosophy (the philosophy of X) is "what is X?" A philosophical approach to the question "what is economics?" is less likely to produce an answer than it is to produce a survey of the definitional and territorial difficulties and controversies. Similar considerations apply as a prologue to further discussion of methodology in a subject. Definitions of economics have varied over time from the modern origins of the subject, reflecting programmatic concerns and distinctions of expositors.^[2]

Methodology and epistemology of economics

An epistemology deals with how we know things. In the philosophy of economics this means asking questions such as: what kind of a "truth claim" is made by economic theories – for example, are we claiming that the theories relate to reality or perceptions? How can or should we prove economic theories – for example, must every economic theory be empirically verifiable? How exact are economic theories and can they lay claim to the status of an exact science – for example, are economic predictions as reliable as predictions in the natural sciences, and why or why not? Another way of expressing this issue is to ask whether economic theories can state "laws". Philosophers of science and economists have explored these issues intensively since the work of Alexander Rosenberg and Daniel Hausman dating to 3 decades ago.^[4]

Rational choice, decision theory and game theory

Philosophical approaches in decision theory focus on foundational concepts in decision theory – for example, on the natures of choice or preference, rationality, risk and uncertainty, and economic agents.^[5]

Game theory is shared between a number of disciplines, but especially mathematics, economics and philosophy. Game theory is still extensively discussed within the field of the philosophy of economics. Game theory is closely related to and builds on decision theory and is likewise very strongly interdisciplinary.^[6]

Ethics and justice

The ethics of economic systems deals with the issues such as how it is right (just, fair) to keep or distribute economic goods. Economic systems as a product of collective activity allow examination of their ethical consequences for all of their participants. Ethics and economics relates ethical studies to welfare economics.^[7] It has been argued that a closer relation between welfare economics and modern ethical studies may enrich both areas, even including predictive and descriptive economics as to rationality of behavior, given social interdependence.^[8]

Ethics and justice overlap disciplines in different ways. Approaches are regarded as more philosophical when they study the fundamentals – for example, John Rawls' A Theory of Justice (1971)^[9] and Robert Nozick's Anarchy, State and Utopia (1974). 'Justice' in economics is a subcategory of welfare economics^[10] with models frequently representing the ethical-social requirements of a given theory. "Practical" matters include such subjects as law^[11] and cost–benefit analysis^[12]

its origins inextricably interwoven with the emergence of modern economic thought. Today utilitarianism has spread throughout applied ethics as one of a number of approaches. Non-utilitarian approaches in applied ethics are also now used when questioning the ethics of economic systems – e.g. rights-based (deontological) approaches.^[13]

Many political ideologies have been an immediate outgrowth of reflection on the ethics of economic systems. Marx, for example, is generally regarded primarily as a philosopher, his most notable work being on the philosophy of economics. However, Marx's economic critique of capitalism did not depend on ethics, justice, or any form of morality, instead focusing on the inherent contradictions of capitalism through the lens of a process which is today called dialectical materialism.

Non-mainstream economic thinking

The philosophy of economics defines itself as including the questioning of foundations or assumptions of economics. The foundations and assumption of economics have been questioned from the perspective of noteworthy but typically under-represented groups. These areas are therefore to be included within the philosophy of economics.

Scholars cited in the literature

Related disciplines

The ethics of economic systems is an area of overlap between business ethics and the philosophy of economics. People who write on the ethics of economic systems are more likely to call themselves political philosophers than business ethicists or economic philosophers. There is significant overlap between theoretical issues in economics and the philosophy of economics. As economics is generally accepted to have its origins in philosophy, the history of economics overlaps with the philosophy of economics.

Degrees

Some universities offer joint degrees that combine philosophy, politics and economics. These degrees cover many of the problems that are discussed in Philosophy and Economics, but are more broadly construed. A small number of universities, notably the LSE, the Erasmus University Rotterdam, Copenhagen Business School and the University of Bayreuth offer master's degree programs specialized in philosophy and Economics.

Notes

1. ^{{Cite web|url=http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/economics/|title=Philosophy of Economics, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy|last=|first=|date=|website=|publisher=|access-date=}}
2. ^• Roger E. Backhouse and Steven Medema (2008). "economics, definition of," The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics, 2nd Edition. Abstract.
   • _____. 2009. "Retrospectives: On the Definition of Economics," Journal of Economic Perspectives, 23(1), pp. 221–33. Abstract.
   • Adam Smith ([1776] 1976). An Inquiry into theNature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. Oxford University Press. p. 428.
   • John Stuart Mill (1844). "On the Definition of Political Economy; and on the Method of Investigation Proper to It", Essay V, in Essays on Some Unsettled Questions of Political Economy.
   • Lionel Robbins (1932). An Essay on the Nature and Significance of Economic Science, Macmillan, p. 16.
3. ^• Roger E. Backhouse and Steven Medema (2008). "economics, definition of," The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics, 2nd Edition. Abstract.
   • Uskali Mäki (2008). "scientific realism and ontology," The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics, 2nd Edition. Abstract.
4. ^• D. Wade Hands (2008). "philosophy and economics," The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics, 2nd Edition. Abstract.
   • Roger E. Backhouse (2008). "methodology of economics," The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics, 2nd Edition. Abstract.
   • Alexander Rosenberg (1976). Microeconomic Laws: A Philosophical Analysis, University of Pittsburgh Press. Description and [https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=JFIYQyCY90QC&oi=fnd&pg=PR7&dq=&ots=zj2FtY6S-A&sig=Qs5EwF3ySLM10R59IkLSLHDo52I#v=onepage&q&f=false preview].
   • _____ (1983). "If Economics Isn't Science, What Is It?" Philosophical Forum, 14, pp. 296-314.
   • _____ (1986). "What Rosenberg's Philosophy of Economics Is Not," Philosophy of Science, 53(1), pp. [https://www.jstor.org/pss/187927 127]-132.
   • Douglas W. Hands (1984). "What Economics Is Not: An Economist's Response to Rosenberg," Philosophy of Science, 51(3), p [https://www.jstor.org/pss/187496 p. 495]-503.
   • Bruce J. Caldwell ([1982] 1994). Beyond Positivism: Economic Methodology in the Twentieth Century, 2nd ed. Routledge. [https://books.google.com/books?id=hrqLZsCOg4sC&printsec=find&pg=PR5=onepage&q&f=false#v=onepage&q&f=false Preview].
   • Daniel M. Hausman (1980). "How to Do Philosophy of Economics," PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association, 1, pp. [https://www.jstor.org/pss/192578 353]-362.
   • _____ (1983). "The Limits of Economic Science," in The Limits of Lawfulness: Studies on the Scope and Nature of Scientific Knowledge, N. Rescher, ed. Reprinted in D.M. Hausman (1992 Essays on Philosophy and Economic Methodology, pp. [https://books.google.com/books?id=pM57-DJ2yDcC&printsec=find&pg=PA99=gbs_atb#v=onepage&q&f=false 99-108.]
   • Daniel M. Hausman (1989). "Economic Methodology in a Nutshell," Journal of Economic Perspectives, 3(2), pp. 115-127.
   • _____ (1992). The Inexact and Separate Science of Economics. Description, to ch. 1 link, [https://books.google.com/books?id=F7Vf3sb-ck4C&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_atb#v=onepage&q&f=false preview], and reviews, 1st pages: [https://www.jstor.org/pss/2185742][https://www.jstor.org/pss/687635].
   • Kevin D. Hoover (1995). "Review Article: Why Does Methodology Matter for Economics?" Economic Journal, 105(430), pp. 715-734.
   • Vernon L. Smith (2003). "Constructivist and Ecological Rationality in Economics," American Economic Review, 93(3), pp. 465-508. {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120111154803/http://dev.wcfia.harvard.edu/sites/default/files/Smith2003.pdf |date=2012-01-11 }}
   • _____ (2008). "experimental economics," The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics, 2nd Edition, Abstract.
   • Francesco Guala (2005). The Methodology of Experimental Economics, Cambridge. Description/contents links and ch. 1 excerpt. {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120917074454/http://www.cambridge.org/servlet/file/store6/item2350863/version1/item_9780521853408_excerpt.pdf |date=2012-09-17 }}
5. ^Paul Anand (1993,1995). "Foundations of Rational Choice Under Risk". Oxford. Oxford University Press.
6. ^Cristina Bicchieri (1993). Rationality and Coordination. Cambridge. Description and chapter-preview links, pp. [https://books.google.com/books?id=4SQ4AAAAIAAJ&printsec=toc&dq=%22Rationality+and+Coordination%22&source=gbs_summary_s&cad=0 v-vi]. Game-theory [https://books.google.com/books?id=4SQ4AAAAIAAJ&printsec=toc&dq=#v=onepage&q=game&f=false links].
7. ^• Amartya K. Sen (1970 [1984]). Collective Choice and Social Welfare. Elsevier. Description.
  • Daniel M. Hausman and Michael S. McPherson (1993). "Taking Ethics Seriously: Economics and Contemporary Moral Philosophy," Journal of Economic Literature, 31(2), pp. 671-731.
  • _____ and _____ ([1994] 2005), 2nd Ed. Economic Analysis and Moral Philosophy. Description and preview links.
  • Hal R. Varian (1975). "Distributive Justice, Welfare Economics, and the Theory of Fairness," Philosophy & Public Affairs 4(3), pp. [https://www.jstor.org/pss/22650841975 223]-247.
8. ^Amartya Sen (1987). On Ethics and Economics, Blackwell, [https://books.google.com/books?id=Qv8BLliEl2MC&dq=find&pg=PA138=bn&hl=en&ei=xpXcS-_gBYaKlwfUmOD8Cg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4&ved=0CBYQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q&f=false back cover]. Description and chapter-preview [https://books.google.com/books?id=Qv8BLliEl2MC&dq=find&pg=PR7=bn&hl=en&ei=xpXcS-_gBYaKlwfUmOD8Cg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4&ved=0CBYQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q&f=false links].
9. ^Amartya Sen (1990). "Justice: Means versus Freedoms," Philosophy & Public Affairs, 19(2), pp. [https://www.jstor.org/pss/2265406 111]-121.
10. ^In the Journal of Economic Literature classification codes at JEL: D63, wedged on the same line between 'Equity' and 'Inequality'.
11. ^• Richard Posner (1981). The Economics of Justice. Description and chapter links, pp. [https://books.google.com/books?id=CKEN0F07ChUC&dq=%22economic+analysis+of+law%22+posner&printsec=frontcover&source=bl&ots=GS4jOgg4as&sig=ESu3j8utNT12CSzI_cMU8DMJhYI&hl=en&ei=t54YSrO4K9DHtgfq_72BDQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=8#PPR11,M1 xi-xiii].
   • David A. Hoffman and Michael P. O'Shea (2002). "Can Law and Economics Be Both Practical and Principled?" Alabama Law Review, 53(2), pp. 335-420.
12. ^Sven Ove Hansson (2010). "cost–benefit analysis: philosophical issues," The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics, Online Edition. Abstract.
13. ^Marc Fleurbaey (2008). "ethics and economics," The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics, 2nd Edition. Abstract.
14. ^Amartya Sen (2008). "Culture and Development."