Insider apology for microeconomic theorising?
- Author(s)
- Maarten Janssen, Tarja Knuuttila, Mary Morgan
- Abstract
This comment on 'Economic theories and their Dueling interpretations' questions the descriptive adequacy of the ‘sociology of economics' proposed by Gilboa, Postlewaite, Samuelson, and Schmeidler (GPSS) (2022). We ask whether economists still perceive the role of microeconomic theory as central as do GPSS. In particular, is present-day economics unified by the principles of maximising, subject to constraints and equilibrium analysis? We argue that this is not the case. GPSS’ appeal to the interpretative flexibility of economic theories appears apologetic, especially the suggestion that theories and models, which once were considered positive descriptions or predictive instruments, are now cast as analytical or methodological exercises. We conclude on a more constructive note, drawing from the recent philosophical discussion of modelling which, quite paradoxically, grants highly idealized and simplified models a more important role than GPSS appear to allow.
- Organisation(s)
- Department of Economics, Department of Philosophy
- External organisation(s)
- London School of Economics and Political Science
- Journal
- Journal of Economic Methodology
- ISSN
- 1350-178X
- DOI
- https://doi.org/10.1080/1350178X.2024.2326895
- Publication date
- 03-2024
- Peer reviewed
- Yes
- Austrian Fields of Science 2012
- 502047 Economic theory, 603124 Theory of science
- Keywords
- ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Economics, Econometrics and Finance (miscellaneous)
- Portal url
- https://ucris.univie.ac.at/portal/en/publications/insider-apology-for-microeconomic-theorising(4f4f84b5-daee-40b1-b346-9af83dfe026b).html