|
|
EHS Abstract Submission
(c) 1997 EH.Net
-----------------------------------------------------------
Name: Thomas C. Leonard
Email: tleonard@princeton.edu
Institution: Princeton University
Co-author:
Title: The Reason of Rules in the Intellectual Economy: The
Economics of Science and the Science of Economics
Type of work: E
Internet Address
of abstracted work:
By mail:
Dept. of Economics, Princeton University
Fisher Hall 001
Princeton, NJ 08540
United States
Language: English
Abstract:
This dissertation makes the case for an economics of
science, that is, for using economic ideas to theorize
about science, especially its agents (scientists), its
output (scientific knowledge), and its internal rules
(scientific institutions). Though under-researched relative
to traditional (philosophy) and revisionist (sociology and
rhetoric) theories of science, an economics of science
offers a solution to a problem that plagues both traditions --
how self-interested, fallible agents can produce the collectively
beneficial outcome of reliable scientific knowledge -- and
thereby suggests a remedy for a central methodological dispute
concerning the efficacy of science.
Science studies and economic methodology are introduced in
the context of scientific goals and standards of appraisal.
Economics as a science is considered in light of its methods
and its unique status among the different sciences. The
philosophy of science and the revisionist responses
to it are surveyed, establishing the intellectual antecedents that
underwrite the current dispute in economic methodology.
Revisionist ideas in the "new" economic methodology, particularly
rhetorical economics, are critically reviewed and a case is
made against its epistemological positions on scientific
knowledge, and on the nature and function of scientific standards.
Amendments are proposed, suggesting an economic view of science,
with its more robust explanation for successful science and
for the scientific institutions that, in part, enable that success.
A Smithian economics is developed, which entails agents who
are rational but fallible, self-interested but prudent, and
which emphasizes institutions -- rules of thumb, norms,
conventions, standards -- as decision-making resources when optimality is
undefined, unattainable or undesirable. Institutions are defined,
discussed, and explained. Conceiving of science as a market-like
process, we examine scientific institutions as evolved responses to
market failures and other incentive problems that arise in knowledge
production, and discuss their nature and function.
A case study of the recent minimum-wage controversy in economics is
employed to identify and elaborate upon working institutions in
the science of economics. The standards identified offer
concrete instances of institutions as explained by the
economics-of-science framework, and counterfactual evidence
against claims that scientific standards are too ephemeral, too
tacit or too variable to permit their articulation.
Bibliography: Leonard, Thomas C. 1997. The Reason of Rules in the
Intellectual Economy: The Economics of Science
and the Science of Economics. PhD Dissertation. The George Washington
University.
Subject: B40
Geographical Area: *
Country/Region:
|
|
|
 Send comments and questions to admin@eh.net
|
||