Read it at Understanding Society
A recent volume by Vivian Walsh and Hilary Putnam, The End of Value-Free Economics, brings to a fine point a line of argument that has been brewing for fifteen years: is the logical positivist insistence on separating "fact-based" science from "value-based" ethics any longer a tenable one? Most particularly, are there now compelling reasons for declaring that mainstream economics needs to recognize that the distinction is wholly untenable? Is the zeal for insisting on "positive" economics now unsupportable? Should economists at last recognize that Lionel Robbins' strong exclusion of normative language from the science of economics both unjustified and unwise? Walsh and Putnam argue that the answer to each of these questions is definitive: the strict dichotomy between fact and value in economics can no longer be supported.
Value-free economics?
by Daniel Little
3 comments:
"We need to know what human beings can and want to do, before we can say how well off they are. And this means bringing in orienting human values at the foundations. "
helpful post indeed, Tom. Many if not most of disagreements here arise from these foundations. In my mind, the economic arguments can't move forward until more we all wrap our minds around these issues.
Hilary Putnam is also the author of this: http://www.amazon.com/Collapse-Value-Dichotomy-Other-Essays/dp/0674013808/ref=sr_1_4?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1330711012&sr=1-4
Btw, this denies the F-V dichotomy too: http://www.correntewire.com/the_job_guarantee_and_the_mmt_core_part_fourteen_mmt_is_a_holistic_knowledge_claim_network and presents MMT as value-impregnated. While this overview of the MMT KCN includes vakue commitments: http://www.correntewire.com/the_job_guarantee_and_the_mmt_core_part_fifteen_components_of_the_knowledge_claim_network
Post a Comment