Thursday , May 2 2024
Home / Lars P. Syll / Austrian economics — a methodological critique

Austrian economics — a methodological critique

Summary:
Austrian economics — a methodological critique .[embedded content] This is a fair presentation and critique of Austrian methodology. But beware! In theoretical and methodological questions it is not always either-or. We have to be open-minded and pluralistic enough not to throw out the baby with the bath water — and fail to secure insights like this: What is the problem we wish to solve when we try to construct a rational economic order? … If we possess all the relevant information, if we can start out from a given system of preferences, and if we command complete knowledge of available means, the problem which remains is purely one of logic … This, however, is emphatically not the economic problem which society faces … The peculiar character of the

Topics:
Lars Pålsson Syll considers the following as important:

This could be interesting, too:

Lars Pålsson Syll writes The non-existence of economic laws

Lars Pålsson Syll writes Cutting-edge macroeconomics …

Lars Pålsson Syll writes Tourism — a critical perspective

Lars Pålsson Syll writes Eurofanatiker försöker köra över folket igen

Austrian economics — a methodological critique

.

This is a fair presentation and critique of Austrian methodology.

But beware!

In theoretical and methodological questions it is not always either-or. We have to be open-minded and pluralistic enough not to throw out the baby with the bath water — and fail to secure insights like this:

What is the problem we wish to solve when we try to construct a rational economic order? … If we possess all the relevant information, if we can start out from a given system of preferences, and if we command complete knowledge of available means, the problem which remains is purely one of logic …

Austrian economics — a methodological critiqueThis, however, is emphatically not the economic problem which society faces … The peculiar character of the problem of a rational economic order is determined precisely by the fact that the knowledge of the circumstances of which we must make use never exists in concentrated or integrated form but solely as the dispersed bits of incomplete and frequently contradictory knowledge which all the separate individuals possess. The economic problem of society is … a problem of the utilization of knowledge which is not given to anyone in its totality.

This character of the fundamental problem has, I am afraid, been obscured rather than illuminated by many of the recent refinements of economic theory … Many of the current disputes with regard to both economic theory and economic policy have their common origin in a misconception about the nature of the economic problem of society. This misconception in turn is due to an erroneous transfer to social phenomena of the habits of thought we have developed in dealing with the phenomena of nature …

To assume all the knowledge to be given to a single mind in the same manner in which we assume it to be given to us as the explaining economists is to assume the problem away and to disregard everything that is important and significant in the real world.

Compare this relevant and realist wisdom with the rational expectations hypothesis (REH) used by almost all mainstream macroeconomists today. REH presupposes — basically for reasons of consistency — that agents have complete knowledge of all of the relevant probability distribution functions. When trying to incorporate learning in these models — trying to take the heat of some of the criticism launched against it up to date — it is always a very restricted kind of learning that is considered. Where truly unanticipated, surprising, new things never take place, but only rather mechanical updatings — increasing the precision of already existing information sets — of existing probability functions.

Nothing really new happens in these ergodic models, where the statistical representation of learning and information is nothing more than a caricature of what takes place in the real-world target system. This follows from taking for granted that people’s decisions can be portrayed as based on an existing probability distribution, which by definition implies the knowledge of every possible event (otherwise it is in a strict mathematical-statistically sense not really a probability distribution) that can be thought of taking place.

The rational expectations hypothesis presumes consistent behaviour, where expectations do not display any persistent errors. In the world of rational expectations, we are always, on average, hitting the bull’s eye. In the more realistic, open systems view, there is always the possibility (danger) of making mistakes that may turn out to be systematic. It is because of this, presumably, that we put so much emphasis on learning in our modern knowledge societies.

As Hayek wrote:

When it comes to the point where [equilibrium analysis] misleads some of our leading thinkers into believing that the situation which it describes has direct relevance to the solution of practical problems, it is high time that we remember that it does not deal with the social process at all and that it is no more than a useful preliminary to the study of the main problem.

Lars Pålsson Syll
Professor at Malmö University. Primary research interest - the philosophy, history and methodology of economics.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *