Total Posts:5|Showing Posts:1-5
Jump to topic:

Philosophy of Economics

Wallstreetatheist
Posts: 7,132
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/21/2012 2:55:08 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Does anyone here know of any good academic papers on this subject?
DRUG HARM: http://imgur.com...
Primal Diet. Lifting. Reading. Psychedelics. Cold-Approach Pickup. Music.
pozessed
Posts: 1,034
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/21/2012 3:32:18 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/21/2012 2:55:08 AM, Wallstreetatheist wrote:
Does anyone here know of any good academic papers on this subject?

http://www.world-economics-journal.com...
Logic_on_rails
Posts: 2,445
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/21/2012 3:51:58 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Fascinating subject I must admit - you got me thinking quite a bit. Haven't read this, but try this http://plato.stanford.edu... - Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy. Now, to my own answer.

I would venture to say that economics has a strong lean towards consequentialism - economics is about many things, but it's often about maximising some goal (often wealth) , making more efficient use of some resource etc. In essence, economics often presumes a desired end; one issue I have is that obviously these presumed ends are good ceteris paribus, but it's quite rare that an end is achieved or improved ceteris paribus. Economics very mindset about 'how to achieve x' , 'what does tariff x do? Does that increase prices' is consequentialist.

Now, apart from that whole little point, I'm guessing that economics, in many forms has a component of political philosophy behind it. Particularly in laissez - faire capitalism you have very certain political beliefs, like heavily restricted (or no) government. As for a modern economist, I'd presume they'd support a Lockean balance of powers, as opposed to something like Hobbes Leviathan. Of course, this is all partially dependant on what school of economics one subscribes to, but let's leave it there.

I think one other point of interest would be as to how economic assumptions are derived, and what philosophy has to say about this. I don't wish to take a skeptical view like Hume here, but there's quite a number of epistemological issues on this subject. Furthermore, a completely pure form of empiricism can be discounted.

That's my initial thoughts.
"Tis not in mortals to command success
But we"ll do more, Sempronius, we"ll deserve it