IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/eujhet/v29y2022i1p40-60.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Resolving a seeming paradox in Adam Smith’s study of history with regard to inference to the best explanation

Author

Listed:
  • Kwangsu Kim

Abstract

This paper aims to resolve a seeming paradox in Adam Smith’s study of history with regard to inference to the best explanation. In the Wealth of Nations Smith argued the priority of “natural progress” over the model of historical progress as evidenced by many contemporary historians. These two competing exercises in philosophical history raise the previously unexplored question of what are critical tests to justify which model is the best, with Smith’s wide use of scientific realist standards such as seeking for underlying general causality, generality in explanatory and predictive power, and appeal to the arts of persuasion.

Suggested Citation

  • Kwangsu Kim, 2022. "Resolving a seeming paradox in Adam Smith’s study of history with regard to inference to the best explanation," The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 29(1), pages 40-60, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:eujhet:v:29:y:2022:i:1:p:40-60
    DOI: 10.1080/09672567.2021.1908394
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/09672567.2021.1908394
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/09672567.2021.1908394?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    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:taf:eujhet:v:29:y:2022:i:1:p:40-60. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/REJH20 .

    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.