Year-end Sale % OFF 
Abstract
The relevance to economics of naturalised epistemology (also known as the naturalistic turn) from philosophy of science has recently been argued by economic methodologists, especially by D. Wade Hands (Reflection Without Rules: Economic Methodology and Contemporary Science Theory, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2001). This concept is held by Hands to constitute part of the ‘new economic methodology’ that consists of the ‘interpenetration of economics and science theory’. Contrary to Hands's case, naturalised epistemology is shown here not to represent a qualitatively new concept, to possess little coherent meaning, and to be incapable of charting an innovative way forward for economics. Although there are more issues concerning naturalism bearing on economics than are noted by Hands, three specific limitations of naturalised epistemology are discussed. These and other limitations are related to the economics examples Hands proposes suggesting the usefulness of naturalised epistemology for economics.
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
