IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/cambje/v20y1996i5p513-22.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Realist Philosophy of the Social Sciences and Economics: A Critique

Author

Listed:
  • Baert, Patrick

Abstract

This paper deals with (critical) realism as a contribution to the philosophy of the social sciences. In the first section, critical realism is introduced. Differences from other philosophies of science, especially positivism and falsificationism, are discussed. In the second section, critical realism is criticized: first for failing as a normative philosophy of science, second for relying upon an impoverished notion of knowledge-acquisition, and finally for its unsuitability as a contribution to social theory. (c) 1996 Academic Press Limited Copyright 1996 by Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Baert, Patrick, 1996. "Realist Philosophy of the Social Sciences and Economics: A Critique," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 20(5), pages 513-522, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:cambje:v:20:y:1996:i:5:p:513-22
    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. G. Hodgson, 2006. "Some Claims Made for Critical Realism in Economics: Two Case Studies," Voprosy Ekonomiki, NP Voprosy Ekonomiki, issue 7.
    2. Paul Downward, "undated". "Risk, Uncertainty and Inference in Post Keynesian Economics:A Realist Commentary," Working Papers 98-8, Staffordshire University, Business School.
    3. Edward Fullbrook, 1998. "Shifting the mainstream: Lawson's impetusEconomics and Reality tony lawson routledge, 1997, 364 pp," Atlantic Economic Journal, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 26(4), pages 431-440, December.
    4. Muchlinski, Elke, 2003. "Épistémologie et probabilité chez Keynes," L'Actualité Economique, Société Canadienne de Science Economique, vol. 79(1), pages 57-70, Mars-Juin.
    5. Muchlinski, Elke, 2003. "Against rigid rules: Keynes's economic theory," Discussion Papers 2003/2, Free University Berlin, School of Business & Economics.
    6. Bernard Walters & David Young, 2001. "Critical Realism as a Basis for Economic Methodology: A critique," Review of Political Economy, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(4), pages 483-501.
    7. Lukáš Kovanda, 2010. "Kritický realismus: ontologická báze postkeynesovské ekonomie [Critical Realism as an Ontological Basis of Post-Keynesianism]," Politická ekonomie, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2010(5), pages 608-622.

    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:oup:cambje:v:20:y:1996:i:5:p:513-22. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/cje .

    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.