Methodological Subjectivism Research Articles

ВІД СТРУКТУРНОЇ ЛІНГВІСТИКИ ДО СЕМІОЛОГІЧНОЇ ФІЛОСОФІЇ: ІСТОРИКО-ФІЛОСОФСЬКИЙ АНАЛІЗ

The article shows the evolution of views on the interpretation of language, as a universal method, which in some way influences philosophical discourse. It has been outlined that semiotic approach to the study of language was formed already in the depths of linguistics (F.D. Sosyur, R. Jacobson, etc.), which laid the groundwork for overcoming the methodological subjectivism of prior science and philosophy. It is emphasized that the linguistic structure is not just an explanatory construct; it, having isolated a set of certain metaphysical opposition, seeks to overcome them and go beyond the limits of empirical research. With its help it is possible to consider mental and spiritual phenomena as such that are not deduced causally from the physiological processes, but rather internally programmed, that means that they create certain structures (E. Husserl), which causes the emergence of a variety of spectacular theories in the block of humanities, who sought scientific rigor and renovation of their own methodological reflection, appealing to the systematic and objective approach to linguistics, thus laying the foundations of semio logical philosophy. Characterized by the peculiarities of semiotic philosophy, namely: the origin of dyadic and triadic models of structuralists and post-structuralists with their representativeness of time-space opposition; the impossibility of chronological distinction between structuralism and post-structuralism and their combination in a single way of philosophizing; offering a conceptual apparatus for finding a new form of rationality (the so-called formal rationality), which implies a multitude of actualizations in verbal psychoanalysis (J. Lakan), literary criticism (R. Bart), structural epistemology M. Fuko, anti-metaphysical demarches J.Derid and J.F.Liotara and attempts to simulacrizationof reality by J. Bodriyar.

A Escola Austríaca de Economia na História do Pensamento Econômico

O presente artigo tem como finalidade investigar algumas contribuições à teoria econômica feitas pelos principais economistas da Escola Austríaca, desde seus precursores, com os escolásticos de Salamanca, até os aportes de F. A. Hayek. Para tanto, buscou-se referências em arcabouços teóricos, utilizando a metodologia de consulta bibliográfica em livros, artigos e outros meios que propagam os princípios da Escola Austríaca. O estudo foi estruturado de forma a primeiramente examinar os precursores da moderna Escola Austríaca, posteriormente, as contribuições de CarlMenger, através do marginalismo e subjetivismo metodológico; Böhm-Bawerk, com a teoria de capital e juros na cadeia produtiva e suas considerações sobre preferências temporais; Ludwig Von Mises, com o debate da impossibilidade do cálculo econômico em uma sociedade socialista e, por fim, os ensinamentos de F. A. Hayek e sua teoria austríaca sobre os ciclos econômicos.

The Role of Transaction Costs in Douglass North’s Understanding of the Process of Change in Economic History

The purpose of this chapter is an attempt to reconstruct the evolution of North’s approach to understanding economic history. Underlying this evolution has been an increasing recognition of the role that transaction costs play in explaining the economic performance of different societies through time. I argue that, as a by-product of North’s emphasis on transaction costs throughout his scholarship, he transitioned from a neoclassical to an Austrian understanding of the process of economic change. The implications of North’s growing emphasis on transactions costs throughout his career was a growing importance of other complementary features of economic theory, shared by Austrians, to explain processes of institutional change throughout economic history. These features of Austrian economic theory include: methodological subjectivism; competition and discovery under uncertainty; a dynamic conception of learning through time; and the role of ideology in structuring the patterns of meaning and purpose attached to human action.

Complexidade, Formalismo Teórico e Liberdade

Este artigo discute o ‘dilema lachmaniano’: uma teoria sobre ordens espontâneas requer os elementos de subjetivismo metodológico e complexidade do problema alocativo, mas a representação formal na teoria econômica da complexidade do problema econômico traz consigo o risco de perdermos de vista a própria apreciação desses elementos. Uma saída para esse dilema é dada por uma interpretação metodológica adequada dos conceitos teóricos. Nesse sentido, argumentaremos que os austríacos são seguidores da metodologia clássica no que diz respeito às consequências da complexidade.

Methodological subjectivism and the interpretive approach in political economy

Stemming from dissatisfaction with neoclassical methodology, heterodox economists have called for an alternative approach to explain human behaviour. This paper argues for the importance of understanding the role of human agency in political economy. It attempts to integrate the subjectivist method in political economy and the interpretive approach in sociology to construct a new framework to understand human action and social phenomena. This paper concludes with a formulation of a subjective interpretive framework by integrating Austrian subjectivism, interpretive sociology and phenomenology to arrive at a fruitful theory of human action.

Предмет экономической науки

Adam Smith defined economics as “the science of the nature and causes of the wealth of nations” (implicitly appealing – in reference to the “wealth” – to the “value”). Neo-classical theory views it as a science “which studies human behavior in terms of the relationship between the objectives and the limited funds that may have a different use of”. The main reason that turns the neo-classical theory (that serves as the now prevailing economic mainstream) into a tool for manipulation of the public consciousness is the lack of measure (elimination of the “value”). Even though the neo-classical definition of the subject of economics does not contain an explicit rejection of objective measures the reference to “human behavior” inevitably implies methodological subjectivism. This makes it necessary to adopt a principle of equilibrium: if you can not objectively (using a solid measurement) compare different states of the system, we can only postulate the existence of an equilibrium point to which the system tends. Neo-classical postulate of equilibrium can not explain the situation non-equilibrium. As a result, the neo-classical theory fails in matching microeconomics to macroeconomics. Moreover, a denial of the category “value” serves as a theoretical basis and an ideological prerequisite of now flourishing manipulative financial technologies. The author believes in the following two principal definitions: (1) economics is a science that studies the economic system, i.e. a system that creates and recombines value; (2) value is a measure of cost of the object. In our opinion, the value is the information cost measure. It should be added that a disclosure of the nature of this category is not an obligatory prerequisite of its introduction: methodologically, it is quite correct to postulate it a priori. The author concludes that the proposed definitions open the way not only to solve the problem of the measurement in economics, but also to address the issue of harmonizing macro- and microeconomics.

What is the Latin for ‘Mayonnaise’? A Response to Bagus, Howden and Gabriel

If fractional-reserve demand deposits are common, and illegitimate, an obvious flaw in the banking system is exposed. However, this article maintains that the only reason why demand deposits may be considered illegitimate is because of a way of defining them that renders them almost irrelevant. This article provides a response to Bagus et al. (J Bus Ethics, Forthcoming, 2014), and identifies examples of how they misrepresent Evans (J Bus Ethics, Forthcoming, 2013). It also provides further considerations on the tradeoffs relating to the availability of a deposit; methodological subjectivism; and the potential for hybrid contracts. Deposit and loan contracts may be hard to mix, but the actual results of doing so should not be ignored.

Carl Menger on the theory of economic history. Reflections from Bulgaria

Carl Menger founded the Austrian School of economics at the end of the 19th century. He rejected some of the main ideas of the German Historical School in his work Investigations into the Method of the Social Sciences with Special Reference to Economics (1881). The submitted paper presents the main implications of the investigations on the theory of economic history with a special reference to the economic history and history of economic thought of the Balkans. The emphasis is on the methodological subjectivism, spontaneous order, rejection of the teleological understanding of the process of economic development, and the application of mathematical models. These principles could be used as a theoretical base of the historical research, though they are widely underestimated in modern economic history.

The theory of patronized goods in the optics of comparative methodology.

The present study focuses on the methodological aspects of the Theory of patronized goods, modifications of two liberal principles of the Austrian school, incorporated into mainstream economic theory - "methodological subjectivism" and “methodological individualism”, as well as the standard axiom of "homogeneity of economic agents". The paper discusses some modifications to these assumptions and their various combinations that form the basis of a number of theories that justify state activity. Analysis of the basic premises of the theory of public goods and merit goods, and the concept of libertarian paternalism allowed the author to suggest that from the point of view of methodology, these theoretical constructions are particular cases of the Theory of patronized goods based on "methodological subjectivism", "methodological relativism" and "the principle of heterogeneity". In the Theory of patronized goods they are integrated in the form of supposition that every person depending on the level of his understanding and his value judgments acts subjectively optimally in the given circumstances; in the principle of utility complementarity, according to which there may be a group interest alongside with the individual interests of the group members; and in the form of two irreducible to each other branches of formation of public interest – market and political.

The Theory of Partonized Goods in the Optics of Comparative Methodology

The present study focuses on aspects of Theory of patronized goods, modifications of two liberal principles of Austrian school, incorporated into mainstream economic theory - methodological subjectivism and methodological individualism, as well as standard axiom of homogeneity of economic agents. The paper discusses some modifications to these assumptions and their various combinations that form basis of a number of theories that justify state activity. Analysis of basic premises of theory of public goods and merit goods, and concept of libertarian paternalism allowed author to suggest that from point of view of methodology, these theoretical constructions are particular cases of Theory of patronized goods based on methodological subjectivism, methodological relativism and the principle of heterogeneity. In Theory of patronized goods they are integrated in form of supposition that every person depending on level of his understanding and his value judgments acts subjectively optimally in given circumstances; in principle of utility complementarity, according to which there may be a group interest alongside with individual interests of group members; and in form of two irreducible to each other branches of formation of public interest - market and political.

A new look at the Austrian School of Economics: review and prospects

This paper looks at the Austrian School of Economics from the subjectivist perspective. It begins by reviewing the major architects in the Austrian School, Carl Menger, Ludwig von Mises, Friedrich A. Hayek, Murray N. Rothbard, Ludwig M. Lachmann and Isaac M. Kirzner. The paper then elucidates the major tenets of the Austrian School of Economics, namely methodological subjectivism and interpretative economics; entrepreneurship, knowledge and coordination problems in the market process; central planning and Austrian business cycle. It highlights the agreements with public choice school, new institutional economics, evolutionary economics, feminist economics and disagreements with the Marxist economics, Neo-Ricardian School and orthodox neoclassical paradigm. It also clarifies similarities and differences between the Chicago School and Austrian School of Economics. The paper ends with further suggestions on the Austrian subjectivist approach to economic problems by using two illustrations of recent international events, Financial Crisis in 2007 and nuclear meltdown in Japan.

A Definitional Review of Economics through the Application of the Leading Theories and Methodology of the Austrian School

The author shows that often quoted definitions used in the study of introductory courses in economics for the most part are lacking critical elements that would otherwise provide a more complete understanding of the nature of economic pursuits. The author uses the leading theories and methodology of the Austrian School of to review and critique the definitional construct of the term Economics as it is commonly used in the literature. The author discusses important concepts central to the nature and understanding of economics as understood by the Austrians, such as: the importance of time preference, economics as a learning system, the importance of entrepreneurialism, value determination, scarcity, the fallacy of the concept of equilibrium, human action and Praxeology, the misapplication of the scientific method and scientism to economics as a social study along with a discussion concerning the relative application of econometrics to the field of study. In doing so he touches upon the classical foundations of Austrian School, being: Methodological Individualism and Methodological Subjectivism. The author finishes his review with a look at the Theory of Subjective Value, the Theory of Diminishing Marginal Utility, The Austrian Theory of Price and lastly with a review of the Austrian Theory of the Business Trade Cycle. Through this work the author introduces the reader to the most critical thinkers behind the Austrian School of Economics: Carl Menger, Eugen Bohn-Bawerk, Ludweg von Mises and his student F. A. von Hayek (Nobel 1974). Other notable scholars being referenced include Murray Rothbard and Israel Kizner. This is an essential reading for anyone wishing to understand the basic tenants of this branch of economics.

Ekonomická analýza práva

Economic analysis of law concerns predicting impacts of legislative rules on incentives and behaviour of individuals and judging social efficiency of alternative legislative rules. It applies price theory, welfare theory and public choice theory on creating and applying law. One of its main shortcomings however is the lack of criteria of social efficiency. Modern history of economic analysis of law begins within the framework of property rights and transaction costs theories. The Chicago school has been the most prominent group of economists. Austrian school and New institutional school compete with Chicago school in applying different methods of economic analysis on law. Chicago approach is based on assumptions of rational economic behaviour and stable preferences. In the centre of Chicago paradigm lies Richard Posner's efficiency thesis predicting that law rules develop in efficient ways. Austrian school criticizes Chicago school positivism from the perspectives of methodological subjectivism.