Bitte verwenden Sie diesen Link, um diese Publikation zu zitieren, oder auf sie als Internetquelle zu verweisen: https://hdl.handle.net/10419/93518 
Autor:innen: 
Erscheinungsjahr: 
2013
Schriftenreihe/Nr.: 
MAGKS Joint Discussion Paper Series in Economics No. 52-2013
Verlag: 
Philipps-University Marburg, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Marburg
Zusammenfassung: 
Sugden (2000) offers an answer to the question of how unrealistic models can be used to explain real-world phenomena: by considering a set of unrealistic models, one may conclude that a result common to these models also holds for a realistic model that, however, is too complex to be analyzed, or even just stated, explicitly. This is a kind of robustness argument. Sugden argues that the argument is inductive and that the methodological strategy is inconsistent with received methodological views. This paper argues that Sugden's argument is in need of improvement, that the improved version is deductive, and that the methodological strategy, if applied with care, fits well into one of the received views dismissed by Sugden, namely, hypothetico-deductivism, or the the testing view of science.
Dokumentart: 
Working Paper

Datei(en):
Datei
Größe
270.95 kB





Publikationen in EconStor sind urheberrechtlich geschützt.