IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/cambje/v21y1997i1p73-93.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Mainstream Economic Methodology

Author

Listed:
  • Dow, Sheila C

Abstract

This is a survey of mainstream economic methodology, both in the sense of mainstream methodology and of mainstream economics. Tensions are identified in methodology resulting from an increasing preference for descriptivism over prescriptivism, and in economics resulting from an increasing preference for fragmentation over axiomatization. The increasing attention of methodologists to the actual practice of economists, and of economists to possibilities outside the traditional axiomatic strictures, are both welcome. But, still being based in a dualistic mode of thought, these developments threaten to go too far, denying methodology any constructive role and removing any focus on the foundations for theorizing. Nonmainstream methodology is shown to offer a nondualistic solution which could resolve current tensions. Copyright 1997 by Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Dow, Sheila C, 1997. "Mainstream Economic Methodology," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 21(1), pages 73-93, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:cambje:v:21:y:1997:i:1:p:73-93
    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.

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Knoll Bodo, 2011. "Vom Wert der Blase – Die Funktion der Spekulation in der Marktwirtschaft / On the Value of Bubbles – The Function of Speculation for a Market Order," ORDO. Jahrbuch für die Ordnung von Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft, De Gruyter, vol. 62(1), pages 115-144, January.
    2. Michael McLure, 2004. "Pure Duals, Derived Duals and Paretian Fiscal Sociology," Economics Discussion / Working Papers 04-25, The University of Western Australia, Department of Economics.
    3. Geoffrey M. Hodgson, 2013. "Dr Blaug's diagnosis: is economics sick?," Chapters, in: Marcel Boumans & Matthias Klaes (ed.), Mark Blaug: Rebel with Many Causes, chapter 8, pages 78-97, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    4. Jeroen C. J. M. van den Bergh & John M. Gowdy, 2003. "The microfoundations of macroeconomics: an evolutionary perspective," Cambridge Journal of Economics, Cambridge Political Economy Society, vol. 27(1), pages 65-84, January.
    5. 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.
    6. Philipp Schreck & Dominik Aaken & Karl Homann, 2020. "“There’s Life in the Old Dog Yet”: The Homo economicus model and its value for behavioral ethics," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 90(3), pages 401-425, April.
    7. Kakarot-Handtke, Egmont, 2013. "Understanding Profit and the Markets: The Canonical Model," MPRA Paper 48691, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Alexander Dow & Sheila Dow & Alan Hutton, 1997. "The Scottish Political Economy Tradition and Modern Economics," Scottish Journal of Political Economy, Scottish Economic Society, vol. 44(4), pages 368-383, September.

    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:21:y:1997:i:1:p:73-93. 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.