What Economics is Not: An Economist's Response to Rosenberg
- 1 September 1984
- journal article
- Published by Cambridge University Press (CUP) in Philosophy of Science
- Vol. 51 (3) , 495-503
- https://doi.org/10.1086/289196
Abstract
Alexander Rosenberg (1983) has argued, contrary to his previous work in the philosophy of economics, that economics is not science, and it is merely mathematics. The following paper argues that Rosenberg fails to demonstrate either of these two claims. The questions of the predictive weakness of modern economics and the cognitive standing of abstract economic theory are discussed in detail.Keywords
This publication has 14 references indexed in Scilit:
- The Role of Crucial Counterexamples in the Growth of Economic Knowledge: Two Case Studies in the Recent History of Economic ThoughtHistory of Political Economy, 1984
- Are There Causal Relations Among Dependent Variables?Philosophy of Science, 1983
- The Scope and Method of Economic ScienceThe Economic Journal, 1983
- A logical reconstruction of pure exchange economicsErkenntnis, 1982
- Are General Equilibrium Theories Explanatory?Published by Springer Nature ,1981
- The logical structure of modern neoclassical static microeconomic equilibrium theoryErkenntnis, 1980
- A skeptical history of microeconomic theoryTheory and Decision, 1980
- Should Economists Pay Attention to Philosophers?Journal of Political Economy, 1978
- THE RATIONALE OF GENERAL EQUILIBRIUM THEORYEconomic Inquiry, 1975
- The Winter of Our DiscontentEconomica, 1973