From Maria Alejandra Madi Traditional epistemological theories have fostered an endless debate on dichotomies characterized by forms of objectivism, on the one hand, and forms of relativism/skepticism on the other. Currently, among the deep global social and cultural challenges, the crisis in epistemology is characterized by a radical questioning of the whole matrix within which such dichotomies have been drawn. Taking into account the evolution of Economics as a science, the need for a deep epistemological has already been pointed out by outstanding economists. Joseph Schumpeter, for example, rejected the kind of economic thought that mainly favours deductive methods of inquiry – based on mathematical reasoning- because this habit generates analytical unrealistic results that are
Topics:
Maria Alejandra Madi considers the following as important: Uncategorized
This could be interesting, too:
Eric Kramer writes Patriotism and the Harris campaign
John Quiggin writes Getting old and being old
Lars Pålsson Syll writes The teaching of economics — captured by a small and dangerous sect
Angry Bear writes Open Thread: President Joe Biden Ends His Bid for Reelection
from Maria Alejandra Madi
Traditional epistemological theories have fostered an endless debate on dichotomies characterized by forms of objectivism, on the one hand, and forms of relativism/skepticism on the other. Currently, among the deep global social and cultural challenges, the crisis in epistemology is characterized by a radical questioning of the whole matrix within which such dichotomies have been drawn.
Taking into account the evolution of Economics as a science, the need for a deep epistemological has already been pointed out by outstanding economists. Joseph Schumpeter, for example, rejected the kind of economic thought that mainly favours deductive methods of inquiry – based on mathematical reasoning- because this habit generates analytical unrealistic results that are irrelevant to solve the real-world economic problems. Also John Maynard Keynes warned that the understanding of the economic phenomena demands not only purely deductive reasoning, but also other methods of inquiry along with the study of other fields of knowledge- such as History and Philosophy. Today, Schumpeter’s and Keynes’s criticism could be certainly addressed to those economists whose beliefs ultimately privilege the adoption of a nominalist bias because the dialogue between the economic theories and the economic reality turns out to be abandoned not only in academic research but also in the policy making process. read more