Abstract
In this paper I address the problem of the unrealisticness of assumptions in neoclassical economics. Being accused of using highly unrealistic assumptions in its models, neoclassical economics replied through what later was called the F-twist. Shortly stated, it was claimed that descriptively unrealistic assumptions are ubiquitous in other sciences also, and that economics should be concerned with its predictions instead of its assumptions. The immediate implication of this statement was that all unrealistic assumptions are the same – they are harmlessly unrealistic. Philosophers of economics vivaciously debated this claim and argued that economics made use of several kinds of assumptions which ”had better be true”. Building on this debate I introduce the notion of uniformity assumptions and I argue that in certain conditions they ”had better be true”.
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 callMore From: Innovative Issues and Approaches in Social Sciences
Disclaimer: 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.
