The scientific method of Sir William Petty

James H Ullmer

doi:10.23941/ejpe.v4i2.78

Abstract

An understanding of the precise nature of the scientific method of Sir William Petty has proved elusive to historians of economic thought, in no small part because of a lack of Petty's own characterization of his scientific approach. This research clarifies the nature of Petty's method, as to whether it was primarily inductive or deductive, and to what extent it relied on empirical foundations. The paper employs a two-pronged analysis. First, it examines the main sources of Petty's method: the works of Sir Francis Bacon and Thomas Hobbes, and the synergistic influences of the Hartlib Circle, the Royal Society, the Dublin Philosophical Society, and the Mersenne group. Second, four of Petty's most noted contributions to political economy are deconstructed in order to identify his scientific method. This research concludes that Petty relied almost exclusively on deduction in his scientific approach and that his analysis does not reveal any inductive reasoning. When data was available, Petty constructed his economic theories on empirical foundations.

Highlights

An understanding of the precise nature of the scientific method of Sir William Petty has proved elusive to historians of economic thought, in no small part because of a lack of Petty’s own characterization of his scientific approach
The statement cited above does not allude to any element of induction in his scientific approach, and there has been confusion and disagreement among historians of economic thought on how to characterize Petty’s scientific method
I conclude that Petty relied almost exclusively on deduction in his economic analysis, and as Aspromourgos claims, there is no evidence of inductive reasoning in Petty’s method

Summary

Introduction

An understanding of the precise nature of the scientific method of Sir William Petty has proved elusive to historians of economic thought, in no small part because of a lack of Petty’s own characterization of his scientific approach. Tony Aspromourgos insists that “Petty was an empiricist”, but does not concur that Petty was “an inductivist” (Aspromourgos 1996, 57) This confusion in the scholarly literature motivated me to investigate and analyze Petty’s scientific method in order to determine where and to what extent his approach mirrored the scientific methods of Bacon and Hobbes. I conclude that Petty relied almost exclusively on deduction in his economic analysis, and as Aspromourgos claims, there is no evidence of inductive reasoning in Petty’s method. His economic theories had an empirical component when data was available

Objectives

Conclusion