IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ecj/econjl/v108y1998i451p1848-58.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

If Mathematics Is Informal, Then Perhaps We Should Accept That Economics Must Be Informal Too

Author

Listed:
  • Backhouse, Roger E

Abstract

No abstract is available for this item.

Suggested Citation

  • Backhouse, Roger E, 1998. "If Mathematics Is Informal, Then Perhaps We Should Accept That Economics Must Be Informal Too," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 108(451), pages 1848-1858, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:ecj:econjl:v:108:y:1998:i:451:p:1848-58
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Diecidue, Enrico & Wakker, Peter P, 2001. "On the Intuition of Rank-Dependent Utility," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 281-298, November.
    2. Pillai N., Vijayamohanan, 2008. "In Quest of Truth: The War of Methods in Economics," MPRA Paper 8866, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Alejandro Diaz-Bautista, 2005. "La metodología de la investigación en la Economía Aplicada; The Research Methodology in Applied Economics," Method and Hist of Econ Thought 0509008, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Miguel A. Duran, 2007. "Mathematical Needs and Economic Interpretations," Contributions to Political Economy, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 26(1), pages 1-16.
    5. Waldstrøm, Christian & Svendsen, Gunnar Lind Haase, 2008. "On the capitalization and cultivation of social capital: Towards a neo-capital general science?," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 37(4), pages 1495-1514, August.
    6. Kakarot-Handtke, Egmont, 2011. "The propensity function as formal passkey to economic action," MPRA Paper 34051, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Alessandro Innocenti, 2004. "Paradoxes versus formalism in economics. Evidence from the early years of game theory and experimental economics," Department of Economics University of Siena 433, Department of Economics, University of Siena.
    8. Roger E. Backhouse & David Laidler, 2004. "What Was Lost with IS-LM," History of Political Economy, Duke University Press, vol. 36(5), pages 25-56, Supplemen.
    9. Jean Hindriks, 2002. "La formalisation et la prévision en économie," Reflets et perspectives de la vie économique, De Boeck Université, vol. 0(4), pages 21-31.
    10. Aldegwy, Mohamed & Thiemann, Matthias, 2016. "How economics got it wrong: Formalism, equilibrium modelling and pseudo-optimization in banking regulatory studies," SAFE Working Paper Series 138, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE.
    11. Tamás Dusek, 2008. "Methodological Monism in Economics," The Journal of Philosophical Economics, Bucharest Academy of Economic Studies, The Journal of Philosophical Economics, vol. 1(2), pages 26-50, March.
    12. Sheila Dow, 2009. "History of Thought and Methodology in Pluralist Economics Education," International Review of Economic Education, Economics Network, University of Bristol, vol. 8(2), pages 41-57.
    13. Rubinstein, Ariel, 2001. "A theorist's view of experiments," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 45(4-6), pages 615-628, May.
    14. Turan Yay & Huseyin Tastan, 2010. "Invisible Hand in the Process of Making Economics or on the Method and Scope of Economics," Panoeconomicus, Savez ekonomista Vojvodine, Novi Sad, Serbia, vol. 57(1), pages 61-83, March.
    15. Thiemann, Matthias & Aldegwy, Mohamed & Ibrocevic, Edin, 2016. "Understanding the shift from micro to macro-prudential thinking: A discursive network analysis," SAFE Working Paper Series 136, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ecj:econjl:v:108:y:1998:i:451:p:1848-58. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley-Blackwell Digital Licensing or Christopher F. Baum (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/resssea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.