IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/jinter/v9y1998i2p125-143.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Methodology Rather than the Rhetoric of Economics: McCloskey on Popper and Hume

Author

Listed:
  • Hugh V. McLachlan

    (Department of Social Sciences, Glasgow Caledonian University, UK)

  • J.K. Swales

    (Department of Economics and Fraser of Alander Institute, University of Strathclyde, UK)

Abstract

McCloskey is against what he considers to be the traditional approach to the philosophy and methodology of economics. He is specifically opposed to the philosophies (of knowledge) of Hume and, even more so, of Popper. He seems, generally, to be against philosophy or, at least, philosophy of knowledge and methodology as such and, in comparison to them, offers ‘rhetoric’ for more favourable consideration. We argue that the epistemologies of Hume and of Popper should, indeed, be rejected but that they should be rejected on philosophical and methodological grounds rather than on ‘rhetorical’ ones. While some particular methodological theories can and should, as McCloskey suggests, be abandoned, economic methodology as such stands undamaged by McCloskey’s attempted attack upon it.

Suggested Citation

  • Hugh V. McLachlan & J.K. Swales, 1998. "The Methodology Rather than the Rhetoric of Economics: McCloskey on Popper and Hume," Journal of Interdisciplinary Economics, , vol. 9(2), pages 125-143, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:jinter:v:9:y:1998:i:2:p:125-143
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://jie.sagepub.com/content/9/2/125.abstract
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    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:sae:jinter:v:9:y:1998:i:2:p:125-143. 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: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.