IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/jecmet/v18y2011i2p147-162.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Why economics is not a science of behaviour

Author

Listed:
  • Marek Hudik

Abstract

The paper criticises psychologism, i.e. the idea that economics is a science of behaviour or that it must be rooted in such a science. The argument is based on Hayek and Popper's thesis that economics studies spontaneous order. First, it is argued that if economics is to retain its traditional distance from psychology, it has to abandon the notion that it is concerned with behaviour. Then it is shown that there is no simple one-way causation from the psychological to the social and that the study of spontaneous order must be non-psychological. Further, an attempt is made to clarify some misunderstandings about the concept of spontaneous order and the differences between psychologism and methodological individualism. Finally, it is suggested that the difference between the psychological and the social can be described conveniently in Popperian terms as the difference between the 'World 2' and 'World 3' phenomena.

Suggested Citation

  • Marek Hudik, 2011. "Why economics is not a science of behaviour," Journal of Economic Methodology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(2), pages 147-162.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:jecmet:v:18:y:2011:i:2:p:147-162
    DOI: 10.1080/1350178X.2011.575949
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/1350178X.2011.575949
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/1350178X.2011.575949?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.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Kakarot-Handtke, Egmont, 2012. "Why Post Keynesianism is not yet a science," MPRA Paper 43171, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Kakarot-Handtke, Egmont, 2012. "Keynes’s employment function and the gratuitous Phillips curve disaster," MPRA Paper 43111, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. David Lipka, 2014. "Do economists need virtues?," ICER Working Papers 06-2014, ICER - International Centre for Economic Research.

    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:jecmet:v:18:y:2011:i:2:p:147-162. 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/RJEC20 .

    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.