Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • McCloskey (1998) - Cap 10

    Uploaded by

    Caique
    7 views6 pages
    McCloskey(1998)- Cap 10

    Original Title

    McCloskey(1998)- Cap 10

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    McCloskey(1998)- Cap 10

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    7 views6 pages

    McCloskey (1998) - Cap 10

    Uploaded by

    Caique
    McCloskey(1998)- Cap 10

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 6
    FROM METHODOLOGY 10 TO RHETORIC ‘Any Rule-Bound Methodology Is Objectionable ‘The seater objection to modernism in econom though, is that modernism supports a rule-bound methodology ‘aims to deduce ls fr sence rom the essence of knowledge oF tional reconstruction ofthe history of scence. Ics thatthe phlos ‘her of science can el what makes for good, useful, iu roy slvescience.Ithims that he aa inthe agumens thatthe cent themselves make spontaneously easting xt some as unscienifie or ‘eat placing them fem nthe “context of discovery” The pi undertakes to second-guess the scientific community In scanemice ‘ule-bourd methodology clans that the rulemaker i expt inal ent economic knowledge and inal future economies, oo, retit the growth of the economic conversation to make it ft philosopher Son of the ulate good Such claims from the easy chai ar hand to take seriously Einstein marked that whoever undertakes to st bill up as 2 judge in feld of Truth and Knowledge i shipwrecked by the laughter of ods" (1953, p. 38. The modernist methodologist isa Red Queen CNG Inative argument off with his ead") an the gods are sickring hind their hands, Any methodology that i lwmaking snd i ‘wllave this rise effec. ‘The maker of rules for economic scence his of course, the intentions. Like the man fom the government, hs shen fo help But economists lke fo remark of similar cases of inererence i spontaneous onder that noble intentions are no defense aginst al ble results The methodologit fancies hoe the judge othe tioner His proper busines if any san anachiste one, esa rigidity and pretension of rules. LA. Richards mae the pol the theory of metaphor. “Its busines snot to rplac prt tellus how todo what we nnot do already but a prot Ot 156, From Methegyt9 Rhos shal from the interference of unnecessarily crude views about it” (1936, p. 110) tis regretiable that modernist methodology, oF any methodology consisting of ig recep, read Ie is wor that ts allowed to ‘erfere with natural kl The custom of methodological paper in co- ‘nomics st scold economists for notllowing ito interfere more. Mack ‘aug book summarizing the sate of play of economic methodology ‘1960, The Methadlogy of Economics, isa case in point. ts subtitle promises to tll “How Economists Explain” Tt might beter have been fo the Young Karl Popper Explained,” fori repent attacks ox lant argues in esonones fr filing to comply withthe rules Pop- feral down in Logi er Forsch in 934, Daug’sexrdum typ [ofthe mathodologits in economies: “Economists have Tong been sware ofthe nee fo defend ort” principles of reasoning in their ‘bjt althoughactal practice may ter litle reatonship to what is preached, the presching worth considering on ts own ground’ {sug 1960, pi Such word lowe easly froma modernist pen. Yet ‘tisuncleae why preaching related to actual rhetorical praeice should te worth considering st i, Why do economist have # defend in the ‘betact thelr principles of reasoning, and before what banal? The ‘nethodologi—wuhether login! pots or Popperian or Austrian tr Manast™should havean answer but donot Ancent common sense ind recent pilosophy of slence suggest they cannot ‘Blau peroraton Is eankly prescrip, taking rules for economic pooch ect rom philosophy ‘What methodology can do sto prove criteria forthe acceptance tnd rection of esearch programs, setting standard that will ‘help uso discriminate between wheat ane cha The liate ‘question wecan and indeed must pose about any research ‘rogram! the oe made familar by Popper: what event ifthey otealize, would led to rect that progr? A program that nnot meet hat question hs allen shoe ofthe highest tarda {hat scientific knowledge can attain (Bau 1980, p. 250) 1 sounds grand, but Fintelns gods are rolling in the aisles. Why, the ‘oie of pragmaism asks, should a dubious epistemological principle brea tt of anything a al, muck less of proctice, much less the “ul- alo” et? Doesnt science tae place mento he time in conversations ‘vel short ofthe ultimate? “The operative wor “ulimate au its numerous cousins piste nology such a8 "ideally" "in principle,” "inthe Last a the Second Coming” *Ulimatey’ From Metinadlagy t Rhetoric says the epistemolois the only way ko stich a ach. Ba this cetration does ot peouade ordinary peopl snd ondnary ‘late, They take as obriou hat we kre nian ways, ot aNay reducbleta sight or syntte pri. Theme” ay ent eet, Weneed nlata nourish ee and now no petal pen the sky The spe ofp ogi methloget since Bacon fo experimental acto theo {inate ater” fr instance wl dismiss mere fection as a dl teas inthe ames ara lest posed of tla Joh Dewey ‘te o prgmatlsn reps, “Sack wholesale deprecation nore ‘elu inherent even inthe mut supe refeton frit the Uatestate which spoof ht thought snot ede or ha ha is work suppl the standard forthe oceson In which pol Tens are lard upon are doubt erie” (19. p18). Dewey Clove to another rend of methodological bend, Cardoal Nema ‘ao heed to road church esoning Thirty ys the cod a writen that “assent on ressings nt demons to wi recognized anata be ational, es nas ature tons, fama othe pent an cleanin to bean ifriy or a trovagance” (O87, p50) By defending acaba of reasoning, Course, Dewey and Newman were not retin tor aos tl Stuting down of hbratarie They were eng eave et ‘xm thal arrows human reson eo one pertcust Knd of at us mos! facts and mst con yen resconing “none wold ommend the vison of scent exploration hat test of he eltemologel methodoogists sem fone. amounts 2 dest nthe Continental sense oegn fo the aon of aay iosophy Dewey and Newman would have approved: Caine Ploraton is brave and good. Reusing to offer htages fo even {hough not raneevenin aden ccs coward opuh youd tak from theiden of lfctonby evidence Fig faces we ala is pod his modest sone we are all expire” ‘The Prod coneyantherneaatoing age ithe wo onl ‘snd vidence Should tall be "oc “experimental” “observable? Can it be? ama ae i Something awry withan appl oan ope nln sckty, appl defending ton itera rounds tat bins by donate ‘erin ways of osoning as forbidden ad certain seo tay ‘nesninglss, The inoernceia modernism shows in Poppers Te ‘Sekt ants Eons (1945) which ely hone th ors 8 9 socaty to pejchomalyts and Marsts—charjed wth Vala ‘manner ners elton The iicaky at the From Methodology to Rican Popper would have to clos the border aswell line of physi 1 Galoo Gaile the charmersof subatomic particles. During he 19% ‘ome piyscty did infact tect atoms on the properly modernist founds that such mater were not observable; and nowadays as the Physic Steven Wonberg has noted (1985, pp. 9) no modernist would hunt for quarks An economist wetback sez for working in such an ‘pen society nou be deported suamally onthe next rack (though ‘Plsdng tom the bockchi properly modernist credential) “Thatadding methodologies constraints to science cannot in general be sae will strike economists a cbvious. Constraints, after al, cone sein The conta notion thats rele ound mhodoloyi god for you has been mich questioned recently by plulosophers, Paul Fever herds demolitions ofthe philosophy of clonce and Richard Rory's ‘leconstructions of piloeophy have let methedologist apoplectic Rory views the history ofepisternlogy since Plato aan intellectual bet that did ot come af “People have, cy enoogh, fond something Interesting to sy about the essence of Force, and the definition of umber They might have found something intersting to say about Awessence of Tet But in fact they havent” (198, px “The founding rile of Descartes humsel has been sratnized in this way by JA. Setter, who conchides that Descartes “method alk ‘vst ot abstiactd fom sce practice in some area of mathemat is anc less pss twas produced by a megalomaniacal peror- hance of operons of analgiel extension upon the terms ofa ds ‘ure, universal abemalics fone of Descartes’ projects which iselt Could not dorwhat twas purported todo” (983,61) “The plulowphess are here following antimethodologial findings from other fields In pasicular the sociology and history of scince ttnce 1982 ors have left the old ules of methodology looking unper- ‘lasve The sociologist and historians ook to discovering what actu- ally happened in science favoring what happened over the Astounding Svs etal in the opening chapers of science books. By tis simple ‘levic the methodlogial chims of moderns have Been rejected ne peat I can be trod in economics 5 wee seen. ‘Methodology Is Middle Management It wene not so damaging to common sense, Method- log, strutting arvund touing odes to working sent, woud only belay: In economics it stands the middle of meta-econamical Ne ‘rarely from shop lor to boxrdroom At the bottom i method with & pris test a From Methodology to Rhetoric mall m ever humble a helpful about which no reasonable person ‘would complain or even joke much. It tells an economist what todo ‘when the data have been selected na particular srt of biased way or What od hen shard to think of esos for price and quality to hang in a certain market, It tolls rather badly hve to write scientific [rose andi ell cater well, hor to grasp a station in which prois Fea fo be earbed by news entrants I tells hw to avoid the shop- Floor mistakes of statistical sigiicance. Following oan Rabinso,econ- ‘miss eal those their box of fools The to are economic theory in is ‘bal and mathematical frm, statistical theory and practic, fail laity with certain accounting conventions and statistical sources, and 1 background of silizet storia fact and wordy experience, The tev of Sch tol fo fashion sturdy lite arguments the meter ofthe ‘sonomist the economists method. Tar above meow smal adhe peak ofthe schoasy enter prise sand the conversion norms of evlzation. The German phi- Towopies Jasgen Habermas and his radtion call those Spacek 1973, 110), Don le: pay attention; dont sneer: cooperate don shout let ‘ther people talk be open-minded; explain yourself when asked don't ‘sor fo vielen or cpiracy inate of your ideas. We anno maine food conversation or good inlet ie dentin thse, They aro {he rates, the “conversational implcatures” a the Lagusts pat ‘doped by the act of ning a conversation, whether among econo: Ite about howto manage te economy or between parents about hove tomanage the teenager Socratic dialogue—atany rate when his inter- Tcutors ave permitted to soy something besides "So it would seer, Socrates been the model of nlletual discourse We do not trays follow the model bat that's nota weason to abandon it sa norm, Unlike te norms of modernism itmakes sense The worst academics isnot tobe illogical or bly informed but to exhibit eynical disregard forthe norms of scholal conversation. ‘Between the fop and the bottom, a middle manager ina green sit below the cool masly of Saceticand above the workaday tity ‘ethod with a small m,sands Methodology Because eanot cla the specifistyof practical advice to economists, o othe laveonn, i ‘ot anetiod, Because doesnot claim the generality of how tos ‘Wel ln our culture or in economics, snot Sprache it aims ‘etd tobe a universlizaton from particular sconces to a sclence ‘ence in general, What makes Methodology comical is what us snakes the bourgeois genihomme comscal- The joke i his dal tion, at once master ad servant, inlined hereon to hypo doublet, umble and yet pompous From Methodology to Rhetoric ‘The schools of economic have each ther comical attchments 0 methodology, A Marxist exonotte Methodology for example, has eles Sicha: “The history ofall hitherto existing socety Is the history of cass ‘irugale Use statistics, wich are sient: Beware of remark infected by false consciousness. Neoclassical Methodology, the dominant one inthe English-speaking ‘word says among othe things: The history of all hitherto existing Society isthe history of intrae- ions among selfish individual ‘Usestatats, which ae scenic: Beware of ear that ate nonfalsifable or roncbservable. Ausirian methodology 5095, “The hstory of al utero existing scythe history of itera Tions among afisk nda ‘ (oti gel ata foe they are anstory figment Dewar that do nckaccond wth Austan Methodological cep Sina rls petain to other moder schools oF to more slly d- Sul tuchosemong hem. They share thesbange Cartesian notion that price nearing to the whatever sts blow Sci and ‘RoE plain method is poste and wil yield hares of rath, on defense of metovlogy pet wht ce ey fave by boron ing rest rom Sprache ook from mated. The ply fri eet “ju mot have « Methodology Ridden somewhere Aponte ony the methodology pretends to be a practi rule of inks ven moray ony ahs ver tbe moral rules of Sra The pn shat apo tng when ut on is om 7 pein Mehogy serve cel to demacte Us rm Them. demuatng wince fom nonscence, Once the sadist ave bara Batusan for nonssences suchas sol peychoasal st ‘puncture mutrional medicine, Marx economic epoonbendi, ee yhing le they donot wih to dacs, they can get on withthe Mngt hand witha er head Methodology and ts ovr, the [emurcaon Ps What i Since? How 6 o be distinguisbed forces mys png ying om ‘emationto people on ouside of the demarcation ine “Tape ah cpl about the uss of ethodsogy and From Methodology tv Rhetoric epotemology have been unpersuasive Indeed thas not ually been thought neceneryt stops owas persion. The many tana Pulses and the fe emaining Misono sclenee Work by {coi ues jin ina prolonge if somewhat nero scr ary Dentating exploration of ti ins of amas Stanley Rosen eevee Thatom appreciation ofits nits nol yet tong enough o prevent the typical practioner of analytes! pilseophy sm succumbing othe temptton of confsing ny or fulton of oppesing views” He ‘ema that the very “song ofthe tats ovement have ied toa general fale fo neta Ue sho mature of own juin 1980p). “alos atempis have ben mae to ecu ome rede of thinking about methndolgy Aa economist Bruce Caldwell as conte theatempt nh stn 2th history of methoolgy ne. tose jon Pos Eom Modal if 1 Coty Ca srelladencates methodologic! puri, sds Laeence Bland a ‘ther sonomit inhi The Fat} Ean Method (1882) These coomists a hers inten oer on the coeraton abut fhe ‘sconce of Truth tat Rony finds so icing in promi bet with 4 ‘onelsprito tration and lace You epi wonder wher po. lca infact ep thet oleaion ad balance or long ina cones Eon aout my rth and hie. As Roty ght any they haven! ye Good Science Is Good Conversation What distinguishes good ffom bad in eared dis: course, then, i not the adoption ofa particular methodology, but tarnest and inteligent attempt fo contribute to a conversation. TNS the oldest of philosophical dactrines, Pato vas as Cer sai, the es ator when making mery of erator and hls Socrates eas the sta best conversational from the pen of man trying tend conversation ‘Thebes! moder staement is Michael Oakeshott © "Ascii Moma ‘beings, weave the inertors neither of an inguiy about ures 5 the world, or ofan accumulating body of sncrmaton, but of 8 co ‘eration begun in Ue primeval fret and extended snd made articulate inthe course of centuries, Eduction, propery speaking, ‘nintiation,.. im which we acquire the inelectua and mora abl appropriate to conversation” (1983 pp 198-9) taal conversation i of cours nat the whole point, though pat st Ina broader sense, Cicero conversed with Anstote and Marx Wi ‘Adam Smith, True, one must not exaggerate the enthusiasm of Is From Methoology to Retorie ‘uals for ral conversation. The lack of terest in what that it Jones has to say makes much intellectual dispute pueile. Durkheim and ‘Weber were contemporaries athe ith of sociology, worked onsnlar subjects and contributed largely to networks of conversation in thelr fields, yt nether so much as mentioned the other (Leplnes 1983) But ‘such rie ke the passions about Jones, ate fl tobe violations ofthe fntllctal Specht Theron of conversation ves an answerto the demand fr san- dards of persuaivencs. You recognize with ease when a conversation inone's on ed working well Most economists woul ogre, ot stance hat at prosent the conversation about game theory iol Work ‘ng well aftr Some ery promise. Abstract general siibriun, Mke= ‘wise suffered a sharp decline from a brie period of brilliance, On the other hand, no economist familiar withthe sittin would doubt that {he conversation in economic history improves acl fom the 1950 ‘othe 1960s and continues at this higher lve. “The conversations overap enough io make you almest os sure about neighboring fies examining the overiap is what editor, referee, and ‘membersof research panels do. The overlaps of the overly a= Poly ‘nce cserved,Kegp al bonst isometry tobe. QED: the overlapping conversations protde the standards. It sa market srgyment. There no need for pilosophical awmaking or methodological regulation to Keep the ecomomy of inlet unig ast fine “Amelie Oksenkers Rorty writes that what x crucial is ou ably to engage in continaous conversation, testing one another, discovering ‘ur hiden presuppositions, changing our minds bets we have ls toned othe voices of our fellows Lsatis ls change thelr minds but {heit minds change with the ties of the moon and not because they have listened, rel listene, to their fiends’ questions and objections” (1983, p62) ta womans view a5 well, el Ustening. We can pray ‘orstich a character of argument in economic. Perhaps when econo mists are dsburdened of thee philosophical ggg and begin f 00k ‘thw they converse—reallyéonverse—i wil eso, Rhetoric Isa Better Way to Understand Science A say to get out of the maernist maze ls o pick up ‘hat thread long separated fom science rhetoric. Rhetoric does al with Truth ety it eas with conversations a iterary way conversation of economists and mathe “rom Metholgy to Rhetoric maticians as much a of posts and novelists canbe used 361 have Shown fora iteraryciiesmn of cence. The homaniste wadibon in ‘Western cviizton, nother words con be sd to understand he ‘tie aiton "Theliterary epistemological and methodological strand of he nee shetrihave nor ye combed ito one cord Tey belong together in A sudy of how scholars speak toi of inguin te eve of the ‘inssanrevcaton th neh power and ection reformer Teter Ram (150 brought fo complain a medieval elec) 0 ‘Pept fetorc to mere eloquence ving Ip in charge all ea na In some of the fxtooks tat Desares insole a boy the ‘merely potable argument vaste subnet theindobtable st urer Hose onsen eons suche organ ofthe ital Shs was well ued to the Cartesian progam to put kroedge ot Fourvations bal by plsopby ne mathemati ‘Although the bes si lle Bling fr Hee reason 0 only mathematica anne was ound, the program fled. Pre ‘Titargument wesin he menstine kept subordinate to cert Ee Sion thesclenee of uncer sought nce fondo Sitngat various tine the ssor of Bayes and Wal. In Rory word fellowing Dewey the ssach fr the foundations of knowedge Descartes, Locke, Home, Kant ssl ane Carnap was the tmp tthe que for cranty ove he guest or wisdom Rory 178 pl Dewey 1929 pp 9 227) To einen rhetorie propely under iStorensate wer and wieerressoning Other Sciences Have Rhetorics Forallits lam tothe sclentifc priesthood, then, nomics ferent fom the man in the stoet'smageof science 9 ‘ists recognize neni But economists should be glo that Sbjct its poorly eth this image es wel withthe Nev Rhetor ‘3s do ties long foreign to economics, sich asthe study of literati Gr polities of la. Economists, expecially neoclassical economists, ‘Shmnetimes cst tha her fe sells, produclg fom 2x { verce of ‘Observable implications” by way of lenge chains of oning. Their aster Alfed Marshall sid lng ago ta this is por Sciption and bad advice. Economics actually uses shor, tat in Marshals phrase, or in Avstotl's way, short and informal fats, Economic, nother words nota Scie inte way We {Oruncerstand that word in high schoo. From Methobgy to Rite ‘But neither, realy ar other sionces. Economists can eax. Other c- ‘ences even theater mathematical sciences ae rhetorical. Mathemat ics totake the queen herself seems toan oulsier to be theming ex amploof obetvity explciness, and demonstrably, Surely here only ‘Truth counts, not human wards. A Tong line of intellects has be- lieved that here is bedrock, theultimate authoey. Yee standards of ‘mathematial damonstation change, as dh example of Bulerin Chap- {ert hints. The last soventy years have been» diesppointment 0 fo- lowers of David Hilbert, who intended to put mathematics on timeless and indublabie foundations. The historian of mathematics Mortis Kline wrote that is now apparent tat the concept ofa universally ac cepted, infalible body of reasoning the majestic mathernatics of 1800 and the pride of man—isa grand usion.” Or again: "Ther is no g- ‘orous definition of rigor. A proofs accepted it obtains the endorse ‘ment ofthe leading specaists ofthe time and employs the principles "tare fashionable a the moment, But no standatd i unveraly

    You might also like