Bitte verwenden Sie diesen Link, um diese Publikation zu zitieren, oder auf sie als Internetquelle zu verweisen: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/311020 
Autor:innen: 
Erscheinungsjahr: 
2022
Quellenangabe: 
[Journal:] Homo Oeconomicus [ISSN:] 2366-6161 [Volume:] 39 [Issue:] 1 [Publisher:] Springer International Publishing [Place:] Cham [Year:] 2022 [Pages:] 37-68
Verlag: 
Springer International Publishing, Cham
Zusammenfassung: 
About sixty years ago, Hans Albert criticized economists for their "model platonism", a methodological attitude that immunizes theoretical models against empirical criticism. Since then, economics has taken an empirical turn; yet, model platonism lingers on. The root of the problem is economists' reluctance to distinguish explicitly between the law-like and the situational assumptions of their models. Without this distinction, it is impossible to give a satisfactory account of the interplay between theory and empirical investigations. Based on Hans Albert's critical rationalism, the paper explains how making the distinction allows economists to escape from model platonism. By identifying critical situational assumptions and robust conclusions, economists can, and sometimes do, find approximate explanations even though they cannot completely avoid unrealistic simplifications.
Schlagwörter: 
Approximate explanations
Critical rationalism
Model platonism
Robustness
Critical assumptions
Unrealistic assumptions
JEL: 
B41
Persistent Identifier der Erstveröffentlichung: 
Creative-Commons-Lizenz: 
cc-by Logo
Dokumentart: 
Article
Dokumentversion: 
Published Version

Datei(en):
Datei
Größe





Publikationen in EconStor sind urheberrechtlich geschützt.