Ontology and the Individual (original) (raw)
Related papers
Ethics and Economics, 2005
John B. Davis explores the question of what the economic individual is. He bases his considerations of orthodox economics on the assumption that these theories implicitly rely on a conception of the individual that has its origin in Locke's idea of the self as subjective inwardness. Economic history then is the attempt to deal with Locke's inherent problems that this view involved. If neoclassical economics still has aspects of human psychology, mainstream economics dropped the subjective concept of the individual out of their considerations. However, Davis demonstrates that even the neoclassical concept of the individual fails to pass the existence test of individual identity. The latter is an idea developed in analogy to philosophers' concern about personal identity and examines if the individual can be distinguished among different individuals and if he or she can be reidentified as the selfsame individual through time. The failure of the theory of the individual in orthodox economics led Davis to develop a concept of a socially embedded individual in accordance with heterodox accounts of economics. He submits this conception to the same test of individual identity. It appears that the socially embedded individual can be said to hold an identity in specific circumstances.
Review of J.B. Davis, "The Theory of the Individual in Economics. Identity and Value"
History of Economic Ideas, 2004
In this book, published in the "Advances in social economics series", John Davis, the well-known author of excellent work on Ricardo and Keynes, ventures into theorizing at large. The topic he addresses is the notion of individual, and his project is that of trying to bring two traditions of discourse into interaction. The first is the general philosophical discussion on the modern invention of the individual, on Descartes's cogito and Locke's tabula rasa, whose main question is how far the modern idea of the individual is over-determined by contingent and hazardous assumption made by seventeenth-century philosophers and then left unquestioned up to the times of Nietzsche, Peirce, Wittgenstein, and Husserl. The most recent highlights of this tradition are the philosophical best-sellers
In the social sciences Tony Lawson has become a major figure of intellectual controversy on the back of juxtaposing two relatively simple and seemingly innocuous ideas. In two books and many papers he has argued first that success in science depends on finding and using methods, including modes of reasoning, appropriate to the nature of the phenomena being studied, and also that there are important differences between the nature of the objects of study of natural sciences and those of social science.
AN ATTEMPT TO RE-DEFINE INDIVIDUALISM.pdf
2016
No other people than economists, are more concerned with the concept of individualism. In fact, mainstream (orthodox) economic theories are designed based on the rational actor model. At the heart of the rational actor model is the notion of individualism. As a byproduct of this economic modelling, orthodox economics and neo-liberal economic orders takes individualism a pillar in their theorizations and policy prescriptions. Though colorful and smart looking, however, those teachings and policy recommendations has been criticized in many terms, particularly since the last two decades or so. This article argues that all those woes against mainstream (orthodox) economics is due to the ill-defined individualism that its theories and policy prescriptions rooted upon; and pin points redefining individualism as a way out. Moreover, this piece attempts to forward brief sketch into the whereabouts of the short comings of orthodox economics; pinpoint consequent socio-economic end-ups of conventional economics and highlight how the re-statement on individualism would mitigate the drawbacks of mainstream economics, both in theory (academic) and practice (policy) fronts.
Ontology and Economics: Tony Lawson and his critics
2008
In the social sciences Tony Lawson has become a major figure of intellectual controversy on the back of juxtaposing two relatively simple and seemingly innocuous ideas. In two books and many papers he has argued first that success in science depends on finding and using methods, including modes of reasoning, appropriate to the nature of the phenomena being studied, and also that there are important differences between the nature of the objects of study of natural sciences and those of social science. This original book brings together some of the world's leading critics of economics orthodoxy to debate Lawson's contribution to the economics literature. The debate centres on ontology, which means enquiry into the nature of what exists, and in this collection scholars such as Bruce Caldwell, John B. Davis and Geoffrey M. Hodgson present their thoughtful criticisms of Lawson's work while Lawson himself presents his reactions. Of course many social scientists disagree with him, but Lawson's arguments are so powerful that few economists now feel that his case can be ignored. Bringing Lawson head-to-head with eleven of his most capable critics, this is a book of intellectual drama. More than that, it is a collection of fine minds interacting with each other and being changed by the process. This book is particularly useful for students and researchers concerned primarily with methodology and future development of economics. It is also relevant to the concerns of philosophers of science and to all social scientists interested in methodological issues.
Post-rationalist Conception of the Self and Neoclassical Economics' Conception of Homo
During the last century, the neoclassical economics' assumption of the human being conceived as a self-interested rational agent who behaves towards expected utility maximization has been widely accepted within international political economy . Specifically, the idea of this rational actor called 'homo economicus' regards the individual whose actions rely on her or his set of preferences, while being devoid of negligible emotions as well as social reflexivity in the process of decision-making .