Skip to main content

2019 | OriginalPaper | Buchkapitel

3. Re-examining Samuelson’s Operationalist Methodology

verfasst von : D. Wade Hands

Erschienen in: Paul Samuelson

Verlag: Palgrave Macmillan UK

Aktivieren Sie unsere intelligente Suche, um passende Fachinhalte oder Patente zu finden.

search-config
loading …

Abstract

During the heyday of discussion about Milton Friedman’s 1953 methodology paper, Samuelson’s operationalism was often discussed as the primary competitor to Friedman’s position. Although Friedman’s paper continues to be discussed—albeit at a steadily decreasing rate—Samuelson’s account of economic methodology has all but disappeared from the literature. This paper offers a re-examination of Samuelson’s account. Why a re-examination now? There are many reasons, but I will focus on just two. The first is that the historical research on Samuelson has exploded since his death in 2009, primarily because of the extensive archival material he left behind. The second is Samuelson’s revealed preference theory; it is methodologically relevant because Samuelson insisted it was an exemplar of his operationalist approach.

Sie haben noch keine Lizenz? Dann Informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft+Technik" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 102.000 Bücher
  • über 537 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Automobil + Motoren
  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Elektrotechnik + Elektronik
  • Energie + Nachhaltigkeit
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Maschinenbau + Werkstoffe
  • Versicherung + Risiko

Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Springer Professional "Wirtschaft"

Online-Abonnement

Mit Springer Professional "Wirtschaft" erhalten Sie Zugriff auf:

  • über 67.000 Bücher
  • über 340 Zeitschriften

aus folgenden Fachgebieten:

  • Bauwesen + Immobilien
  • Business IT + Informatik
  • Finance + Banking
  • Management + Führung
  • Marketing + Vertrieb
  • Versicherung + Risiko




Jetzt Wissensvorsprung sichern!

Fußnoten
1
Box 71, Paul A. Samuelson Papers, Economists’ Papers Archive, David M. Rubenstein Rare Book & Manuscript Library, Duke University (all archival references in this chapter refer to the Economists’ Papers Archive at Duke).
 
2
This literature includes Archibald (1963), Cohen (1995), Garb (1965), Gordon (1955a, b), Lerner (1965), Machlup (1964, 1966), Massey (1965), Nagel (1963), Samuelson (1955, 1963, 1964, 1965), Simon (1963), and Wong (1973, 2006).
 
3
I say “most” and not “all” because there were some American pragmatists—John Dewey in particular—who were sympathetic to operationalist ideas but interpreted them differently than most operationalists and did not self-identify with the positivist tradition. See Hands (2004) for a discussion of these issues.
 
4
See any of the traditional texts on so-called received view philosophy of science (e.g., Hempel 1965; Nagel 1961; Suppe 1977) or for a discussion of these issues with an eye toward economics, see Caldwell (1994: Chapters 2–4) or Hands (2001: Chapter 3).
 
5
The literature is extensive, but a wide-ranging sample is Bergmann (1954), Chang (2009), Gillies (1972), Green (1992), Hempel (1954), Nagel (1961), and Suppe (1972, 1977).
 
6
When one discusses operationalism in psychology and to a lesser extent economics, one immediately raises the question of the impact of behaviorism in these social sciences, since operationalism is frequently—sometimes correctly and sometime incorrectly—associated with behaviorism. But the impact of behaviorism and its relationship to operationalism in the social sciences is a very complex topic that has generated a massive literature in the history and philosophy of the social sciences. Given this, I will stay on task and defer the broader question of behaviorism for another time. Here, I will focus exclusively on Samuelson and his operationalist methodology sans behaviorism.
 
7
Wong (1973: 319) discussed six of Samuelson’s different arguments and raised reasonable concerns about each.
 
8
In many ways, it is disappointing that Samuelson continued to say the same things about economic methodology in published work throughout his life. It is disappointing because there are a few places in his correspondence where he expressed not only understanding of, but sympathy for, some of the ideas in post-positivist philosophy of science. For example: “the real objection to positivism in philosophy, I suppose, is that when you get down to the nitty-gritty, at the very frontier of what you mean about meaning, it cannot deliver the goods. When I read…Quine on Two Dogmas…I am distressed – because the simple-minded distinctions that my youthful reading of Ayer and other such types made me think can be maintained turn out to be fuzzy and even self-contradictory. And most logical positivists of the 1930s, who have not gone senile have recanted on their faith in their simplicities” (Samuelson to Hahn, 14 January, 1972, Box 36).
 
9
This human and intentional property of operations was precisely that which attracted pragmatists like John Dewey to operationalism even though they were generally anti-positivist. See Footnote 3.
 
10
I would suggest that he was a little less successful than Backhouse and Carvajalino seem to argue. Two of the reasons for this are: (i) the sheer fact that the number of pages in Foundations (and Samuelson’s later work) where the analysis is conducted in terms of derivatives and differential equations is significantly larger than the amount conducted in terms of discrete mathematics and (ii) also the fact that many of the linear inequalities are linear because they come from Jacobian or Hessian matrices and were thus also calculus-based. Note that this is not a criticism of the argument that Samuelson was trying to do mathematical economics in a Wilsonian way—it seems clear he was. It simply means that discrete mathematics was extremely difficult in the pre-computer age. Another factor may have been that Samuelson always saw his work as fitting into, and improving on, the grand flow of economic ideas, and doing that, and having it recognized as such, is much easier when the theory is couched in the same mathematical formalism.
 
11
Since this chapter is primarily concerned with Samuelson’s methodology and not his economic theory, it is useful to note that RPT was fundamentally a methodological program. Samuelson did not introduce RPT because of some practical problem with ordinal utility theory, for example, to correct for particular empirical refutations or anomalies or to extend the possible range of application of the theory. He was trying to develop a theory that would have the same empirical implications as ordinal utility theory—the exact same Slutsky conditions—but one that would rest on more epistemically palatable foundations. As Daniel Hausman explains: “The raison d’être of revealed-preference theory was philosophical. It was supposed to enable economists to rid economic theory of references to subjective preferences or to make those references respectable” (Hausman 2000: 112).
 
12
Samuelson says that WARP was “logically equivalent to the reformulation of Hicks and Allen,” but that is not the case in general (although it is true for only two goods), although Samuelson did not know this at the time (and nor did anyone else). It was not until Houthakker’s paper that it became clear that it was SARP, not WARP, that was equivalent to OUT. It was not until, as Samuelson put it: “Mr. Houthakker’s paper arrived in the daily mail” (Samuelson 1950: 370).
 
13
Samuelson “New Foundations for the Pure Theory of Consumer’s Behavior,” Box 152 (no date, but definitely from the 1930s; it says “Paul A. Samuelson Harvard University”). Backhouse says the paper “is undated but is assumed to be 1937” (Backhouse 2017: 652, fn. 40).
 
14
My assessment is thus similar to what Hausman calls the “methodological schizophrenia” of economics, whereby “methodological doctrine and practice regularly contradict one another. This schizophrenia is a symptom of the unsound philosophical premises underlying…economic methodology” (Hausman 1992: 152). I would also note that Samuelson’s use of abstract mathematical functions presumed to be “empirically determinable under ideal conditions” was typical of the theoretical economics of his day. It may not seem very “empirical” today, but it was standard practice then. See Hands (2017a) for more details.
 
15
See Varian (2006) or Vermeulen (2012) for a general discussion of the GARP-based literature and the importance of Afriat’s work in its development. Moscati and Tubaro (2011) discuss some of the early applications of these techniques, while Andreoni et al. (2013), Cherchye et al. (2009), and Crawford and De Rock (2014) provide accessible discussions of the empirical revealed preference literature. Various aspects of this literature are discussed in Hands (2013, 2017a, b).
 
Literatur
Zurück zum Zitat Afriat S.N. (1967) “The Construction of Utility Functions from Expenditure Data,” International Economic Review, 8: 67–77.CrossRef Afriat S.N. (1967) “The Construction of Utility Functions from Expenditure Data,” International Economic Review, 8: 67–77.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Andreoni J., B.J. Gillen and W.T. Harbaugh (2013) “The Power of Revealed Preference Tests: Ex-Post Evaluation of Experimental Design,” Working Paper, Department of Economics, University of Oregon. Andreoni J., B.J. Gillen and W.T. Harbaugh (2013) “The Power of Revealed Preference Tests: Ex-Post Evaluation of Experimental Design,” Working Paper, Department of Economics, University of Oregon.
Zurück zum Zitat Archibald, G.C. (1963) “Problems of Methodology—Discussion,” American Economic Review, 53: 227–229. Archibald, G.C. (1963) “Problems of Methodology—Discussion,” American Economic Review, 53: 227–229.
Zurück zum Zitat Backhouse, R.E. (2015) “Revisiting Samuelson’s Foundations of Economic Analysis,” Journal of Economic Literature, 53: 326–350.CrossRef Backhouse, R.E. (2015) “Revisiting Samuelson’s Foundations of Economic Analysis,” Journal of Economic Literature, 53: 326–350.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Backhouse, R.E. (2017) Founder of Modern Economics: Paul A. Samuelson, Volume I: Becoming Samuelson, 1915–1948. New York, Oxford University Press. Backhouse, R.E. (2017) Founder of Modern Economics: Paul A. Samuelson, Volume I: Becoming Samuelson, 1915–1948. New York, Oxford University Press.
Zurück zum Zitat Bergmann, G. (1954) “Sense and Nonsense in Operationism,” The Scientific Monthly, 79: 210–214. Bergmann, G. (1954) “Sense and Nonsense in Operationism,” The Scientific Monthly, 79: 210–214.
Zurück zum Zitat Blaug, M. (1992) The Methodology of Economics: Or How Economists Explain. Second edition. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. First edition, 1980. Blaug, M. (1992) The Methodology of Economics: Or How Economists Explain. Second edition. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. First edition, 1980.
Zurück zum Zitat Boumans, M. and J. Davis (2015) Economic Methodology: Understanding Economics as a Science. Second edition. New York, Palgrave. First edition, 2010. Boumans, M. and J. Davis (2015) Economic Methodology: Understanding Economics as a Science. Second edition. New York, Palgrave. First edition, 2010.
Zurück zum Zitat Bridgman, P.W. (1927) The Logic of Modern Physics. New York, Macmillan. Bridgman, P.W. (1927) The Logic of Modern Physics. New York, Macmillan.
Zurück zum Zitat Bridgman, P.W. (1954) “Remarks on the Present State of Operationalism,” The Scientific Monthly, 79: 224–226. Bridgman, P.W. (1954) “Remarks on the Present State of Operationalism,” The Scientific Monthly, 79: 224–226.
Zurück zum Zitat Caldwell, B.J. (1994) Beyond Positivism: Economic Methodology in the Twentieth Century. Reissued with new preface. London, George Allen & Unwin. First edition, 1982. Caldwell, B.J. (1994) Beyond Positivism: Economic Methodology in the Twentieth Century. Reissued with new preface. London, George Allen & Unwin. First edition, 1982.
Zurück zum Zitat Carvajalino, J. (2016) Edwin B. Wilson at the Origin of Paul Samuelson’s Mathematical Economics: Essays on the Interwoven History of Economics, Mathematics and Statistics in the US: 1900–1940. PhD dissertation, University of Montreal at Quebec. Carvajalino, J. (2016) Edwin B. Wilson at the Origin of Paul Samuelson’s Mathematical Economics: Essays on the Interwoven History of Economics, Mathematics and Statistics in the US: 1900–1940. PhD dissertation, University of Montreal at Quebec.
Zurück zum Zitat Carvajalino, J. (2018) “Samuelson’s Operationally Meaningful Theorems: Reflections of E.B. Wilson’s Methodological Attitude,” Journal of Economic Methodology, 25: 143–159.CrossRef Carvajalino, J. (2018) “Samuelson’s Operationally Meaningful Theorems: Reflections of E.B. Wilson’s Methodological Attitude,” Journal of Economic Methodology, 25: 143–159.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Cherchye, L., I. Crawford, B. De Rock and F. Vermeulen (2009) “The Revealed Preference Approach to Demand,” in D.J. Slottje (ed.) Quantifying Consumer Preferences. Bingley, UK, Emerald Group Publishing: 247–279. Cherchye, L., I. Crawford, B. De Rock and F. Vermeulen (2009) “The Revealed Preference Approach to Demand,” in D.J. Slottje (ed.) Quantifying Consumer Preferences. Bingley, UK, Emerald Group Publishing: 247–279.
Zurück zum Zitat Cohen, J. (1995) “Samuelson’s Operationalist-Descriptivist Thesis,” Journal of Economic Methodology, 2: 57–78.CrossRef Cohen, J. (1995) “Samuelson’s Operationalist-Descriptivist Thesis,” Journal of Economic Methodology, 2: 57–78.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Crawford, I. and B. De Rock (2014) “Empirical Revealed Preference,” Annual Review of Economics, 6: 503–524.CrossRef Crawford, I. and B. De Rock (2014) “Empirical Revealed Preference,” Annual Review of Economics, 6: 503–524.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Diewert, W.E. (1973) “Afriat and Revealed Preference Theory,” Review of Economic Studies, 40: 419–425.CrossRef Diewert, W.E. (1973) “Afriat and Revealed Preference Theory,” Review of Economic Studies, 40: 419–425.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Friedman, M. (1953) “The Methodology of Positive Economics,” in M. Friedman (ed.) Essays in Positive Economics. Chicago, University of Chicago Press: 3–43. Friedman, M. (1953) “The Methodology of Positive Economics,” in M. Friedman (ed.) Essays in Positive Economics. Chicago, University of Chicago Press: 3–43.
Zurück zum Zitat Garb, G. (1965) “Professor Samuelson on Theory and Realism: Comment,” American Economic Review, 55: 1151–1153. Garb, G. (1965) “Professor Samuelson on Theory and Realism: Comment,” American Economic Review, 55: 1151–1153.
Zurück zum Zitat Gordon, D.F. (1955a) “Operational Propositions in Economic Theory,” Journal of Political Economy, 63: 150–161.CrossRef Gordon, D.F. (1955a) “Operational Propositions in Economic Theory,” Journal of Political Economy, 63: 150–161.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Gordon, D.F. (1955b) “Professor Samuelson on Operationalism in Economic Theory,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, 69: 305–310.CrossRef Gordon, D.F. (1955b) “Professor Samuelson on Operationalism in Economic Theory,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, 69: 305–310.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Green, C.D. (1992) “Of Immortal Mythological Beasts: Operationism in Psychology,” Theory & Psychology, 2: 291–320.CrossRef Green, C.D. (1992) “Of Immortal Mythological Beasts: Operationism in Psychology,” Theory & Psychology, 2: 291–320.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Hands, D.W. (2001) Reflection without Rules: Economic Methodology and Contemporary Science Theory. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. Hands, D.W. (2001) Reflection without Rules: Economic Methodology and Contemporary Science Theory. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
Zurück zum Zitat Hands, D.W. (2004) “On Operationalisms and Economics,” Journal of Economic Issues, 38: 953–968.CrossRef Hands, D.W. (2004) “On Operationalisms and Economics,” Journal of Economic Issues, 38: 953–968.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Hands, D.W. (2013) “Foundations of Contemporary Revealed Preference Theory,” Erkenntnis, 78: 1081–1108.CrossRef Hands, D.W. (2013) “Foundations of Contemporary Revealed Preference Theory,” Erkenntnis, 78: 1081–1108.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Hands, D.W. (2014) “Paul Samuelson and Revealed Preference Theory,” History of Political Economy, 46: 85–116.CrossRef Hands, D.W. (2014) “Paul Samuelson and Revealed Preference Theory,” History of Political Economy, 46: 85–116.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Hands, D.W. (2017a) “The Road to Rationalization: A History of ‘Where the Empirical Lives’ (or has Lived) in Consumer Choice Theory,” European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, 24: 555–588. Hands, D.W. (2017a) “The Road to Rationalization: A History of ‘Where the Empirical Lives’ (or has Lived) in Consumer Choice Theory,” European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, 24: 555–588.
Zurück zum Zitat Hands, D.W. (2017b) “Revealed Preference, Afriat’s Theorem, and Falsifiability: A Review Essay on Revealed Preference Theory by C.P. Chambers and F. Echenique,” Oeconomia, 7: 409–438. Hands, D.W. (2017b) “Revealed Preference, Afriat’s Theorem, and Falsifiability: A Review Essay on Revealed Preference Theory by C.P. Chambers and F. Echenique,” Oeconomia, 7: 409–438.
Zurück zum Zitat Hausman, D.M. (1992) The Inexact and Separate Science of Economics. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. Hausman, D.M. (1992) The Inexact and Separate Science of Economics. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
Zurück zum Zitat Hausman, D.M. (2000) “Revealed Preference, Belief, and Game Theory,” Economics and Philosophy, 16: 99–115.CrossRef Hausman, D.M. (2000) “Revealed Preference, Belief, and Game Theory,” Economics and Philosophy, 16: 99–115.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Hempel, C.G. (1954) “A Logical Appraisal of Operationism,” The Scientific Monthly, 79: 215–220. Reprinted as Chapter 5 of C.G. Hempel (1965) Aspects of Scientific Explanation and Other Essays in the Philosophy of Science. New York, The Free Press: 123–133. Hempel, C.G. (1954) “A Logical Appraisal of Operationism,” The Scientific Monthly, 79: 215–220. Reprinted as Chapter 5 of C.G. Hempel (1965) Aspects of Scientific Explanation and Other Essays in the Philosophy of Science. New York, The Free Press: 123–133.
Zurück zum Zitat Hempel, C.G. (1965) Aspects of Scientific Explanation and Other Essays in the Philosophy of Science. New York, The Free Press. Hempel, C.G. (1965) Aspects of Scientific Explanation and Other Essays in the Philosophy of Science. New York, The Free Press.
Zurück zum Zitat Hicks, J.R. and R.G.D. Allen (1934) “A Reconsideration of the Theory of Value, Parts I and II,” Economica, New Series, 1: 52–76, 196–219.CrossRef Hicks, J.R. and R.G.D. Allen (1934) “A Reconsideration of the Theory of Value, Parts I and II,” Economica, New Series, 1: 52–76, 196–219.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Houthakker, H.S. (1950) “Revealed Preference and the Utility Function,” Economica, New Series, 17: 159–174.CrossRef Houthakker, H.S. (1950) “Revealed Preference and the Utility Function,” Economica, New Series, 17: 159–174.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Lerner, A.P. (1965) “Professor Samuelson on Theory and Realism: Comment,” American Economic Review, 55: 1153–1155. Lerner, A.P. (1965) “Professor Samuelson on Theory and Realism: Comment,” American Economic Review, 55: 1153–1155.
Zurück zum Zitat Machlup, F. (1964) “Professor Samuelson on Theory and Realism,” American Economic Review, 54: 733–735. Machlup, F. (1964) “Professor Samuelson on Theory and Realism,” American Economic Review, 54: 733–735.
Zurück zum Zitat Machlup, F. (1966) “Operationalism and Pure Theory in Economics,” in S.R. Krupp (ed.) The Structure of Economic Science: Essays on Methodology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Prentice-Hall: 53–67. Machlup, F. (1966) “Operationalism and Pure Theory in Economics,” in S.R. Krupp (ed.) The Structure of Economic Science: Essays on Methodology. Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Prentice-Hall: 53–67.
Zurück zum Zitat Massey, G.J. (1965) “Professor Samuelson on Theory and Realism: Comment,” American Economic Review, 55: 1155–1164. Massey, G.J. (1965) “Professor Samuelson on Theory and Realism: Comment,” American Economic Review, 55: 1155–1164.
Zurück zum Zitat Medema, S.G. and A.M.C. Waterman (eds.) (2015) Paul Samuelson on the History of Economic Analysis. New York, Cambridge University Press. Medema, S.G. and A.M.C. Waterman (eds.) (2015) Paul Samuelson on the History of Economic Analysis. New York, Cambridge University Press.
Zurück zum Zitat Moscati, I. (2007) “Early Experiments in Consumer Demand Theory: 1930–1970,” History of Political Economy, 39: 359-401.CrossRef Moscati, I. (2007) “Early Experiments in Consumer Demand Theory: 1930–1970,” History of Political Economy, 39: 359-401.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Moscati, I. and P. Tubaro (2011) “Becker Random Behavior and the As-If Defense of Rational Choice Theory in Demand Analysis,” Journal of Economic Methodology, 18: 107–128.CrossRef Moscati, I. and P. Tubaro (2011) “Becker Random Behavior and the As-If Defense of Rational Choice Theory in Demand Analysis,” Journal of Economic Methodology, 18: 107–128.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Nagel, E. (1961) The Structure of Science: Problems in the Logic of Scientific Explanation. New York, Harcourt, Brace & World. Nagel, E. (1961) The Structure of Science: Problems in the Logic of Scientific Explanation. New York, Harcourt, Brace & World.
Zurück zum Zitat Nagel, E. (1963) “Assumptions in Economic Theory,” American Economic Review, 53: 211–219. Nagel, E. (1963) “Assumptions in Economic Theory,” American Economic Review, 53: 211–219.
Zurück zum Zitat Pearce, K.A and K.D. Hoover (1995) “After the Revolution: Paul Samuelson and the Textbook Keynesian Model,” in A.F. Cottrell and M.S. Lawlor (eds.) New Perspectives on Keynes. Annual supplement to History of Political Economy, 27. Durham, Duke University Press: 183–216. Pearce, K.A and K.D. Hoover (1995) “After the Revolution: Paul Samuelson and the Textbook Keynesian Model,” in A.F. Cottrell and M.S. Lawlor (eds.) New Perspectives on Keynes. Annual supplement to History of Political Economy, 27. Durham, Duke University Press: 183–216.
Zurück zum Zitat Pollak, R.A. (1990) “Distinguished Fellow: Houthakker’s Contributions to Economics,” Journal of Economic Perspectives, 4: 141–156.CrossRef Pollak, R.A. (1990) “Distinguished Fellow: Houthakker’s Contributions to Economics,” Journal of Economic Perspectives, 4: 141–156.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Samuelson, P.A. (1938a) “The Empirical Implications of Utility Analysis,” Econometrica, 6: 344–356.CrossRef Samuelson, P.A. (1938a) “The Empirical Implications of Utility Analysis,” Econometrica, 6: 344–356.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Samuelson, P.A. (1938b) “A Note on the Pure Theory of Consumer’s Behaviour,” Economica, New Series, 5: 61–71.CrossRef Samuelson, P.A. (1938b) “A Note on the Pure Theory of Consumer’s Behaviour,” Economica, New Series, 5: 61–71.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Samuelson, P.A. (1940) Foundations of Analytical Economics: The Observational Significance of Economic Theory PhD dissertation, Harvard University. Box 91 of Samuelson Papers, Duke University. Samuelson, P.A. (1940) Foundations of Analytical Economics: The Observational Significance of Economic Theory PhD dissertation, Harvard University. Box 91 of Samuelson Papers, Duke University.
Zurück zum Zitat Samuelson, P.A. (1947) Foundations of Economic Analysis. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press. Samuelson, P.A. (1947) Foundations of Economic Analysis. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press.
Zurück zum Zitat Samuelson, P.A. (1948a) Economics: An Introductory Analysis. New York, McGraw-Hill. Samuelson, P.A. (1948a) Economics: An Introductory Analysis. New York, McGraw-Hill.
Zurück zum Zitat Samuelson, P.A. (1948b) “Consumption Theory in Terms of Revealed Preference,” Economica, New Series, 15: 243–253.CrossRef Samuelson, P.A. (1948b) “Consumption Theory in Terms of Revealed Preference,” Economica, New Series, 15: 243–253.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Samuelson, P.A. (1950) “The Problem of Integrability in Utility Theory,” Economica, New Series, 17: 355–385.CrossRef Samuelson, P.A. (1950) “The Problem of Integrability in Utility Theory,” Economica, New Series, 17: 355–385.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Samuelson, P.A. (1955) “Professor Samuelson on Operationalism in Economic Theory: Comment,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, 69: 310–314.CrossRef Samuelson, P.A. (1955) “Professor Samuelson on Operationalism in Economic Theory: Comment,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, 69: 310–314.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Samuelson, P.A. (1963) “Problems of Methodology—Discussion,” American Economic Review, 53: 231–236. Samuelson, P.A. (1963) “Problems of Methodology—Discussion,” American Economic Review, 53: 231–236.
Zurück zum Zitat Samuelson, P.A. (1964) “Theory and Realism: A Reply,” American Economic Review, 54: 736–739. Samuelson, P.A. (1964) “Theory and Realism: A Reply,” American Economic Review, 54: 736–739.
Zurück zum Zitat Samuelson, P.A. (1965) “Professor Samuelson on Theory and Realism: Reply,” American Economic Review, 55: 1164–1172. Samuelson, P.A. (1965) “Professor Samuelson on Theory and Realism: Reply,” American Economic Review, 55: 1164–1172.
Zurück zum Zitat Samuelson, P.A. (1972) “Maximum Principles in Analytical Economics,” American Economic Review, 62: 249–262. Samuelson, P.A. (1972) “Maximum Principles in Analytical Economics,” American Economic Review, 62: 249–262.
Zurück zum Zitat Samuelson, P.A. (1983) Foundations of Economic Analysis. Enlarged edition. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press. Samuelson, P.A. (1983) Foundations of Economic Analysis. Enlarged edition. Cambridge, MA, Harvard University Press.
Zurück zum Zitat Samuelson, P.A. (1991) “My Life Philosophy: Policy Credos and Working Ways,” in M. Szenberg (ed.) Eminent Economists: Their Life Philosophies. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press: 236–247. Samuelson, P.A. (1991) “My Life Philosophy: Policy Credos and Working Ways,” in M. Szenberg (ed.) Eminent Economists: Their Life Philosophies. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press: 236–247.
Zurück zum Zitat Samuelson, P.A. (1998) “How Foundations Came to Be,” Journal of Economic Literature, 36: 1375–1386. Samuelson, P.A. (1998) “How Foundations Came to Be,” Journal of Economic Literature, 36: 1375–1386.
Zurück zum Zitat Simon, H.A. (1963) “Problems of Methodology—Discussion,” American Economic Review, 53: 229–231. Simon, H.A. (1963) “Problems of Methodology—Discussion,” American Economic Review, 53: 229–231.
Zurück zum Zitat Suppe, F. (1972) “Theories, Their Formulations, and the Operational Imperative,” Synthese, 25: 129–164.CrossRef Suppe, F. (1972) “Theories, Their Formulations, and the Operational Imperative,” Synthese, 25: 129–164.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Suppe, F. (ed.) (1977) The Structure of Scientific Theories. Second edition. Urbana, University of Illinois Press. Suppe, F. (ed.) (1977) The Structure of Scientific Theories. Second edition. Urbana, University of Illinois Press.
Zurück zum Zitat Suppe, F. (1979) “Theory Structure,” in P. Asquith and H. Kyburg (eds.) Current Research in Philosophy of Science. East Lansing, MI, Philosophy of Science Association: 317–338. Suppe, F. (1979) “Theory Structure,” in P. Asquith and H. Kyburg (eds.) Current Research in Philosophy of Science. East Lansing, MI, Philosophy of Science Association: 317–338.
Zurück zum Zitat Varian, H.R. (1982) “The Nonparametric Approach to Demand Analysis,” Econometrica, 50: 945–973.CrossRef Varian, H.R. (1982) “The Nonparametric Approach to Demand Analysis,” Econometrica, 50: 945–973.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Varian, H.R. (2006) “Revealed Preference,” in M. Szenberg, L. Ramrattan and A.A. Gottesman (eds.) Samuelsonian Economics and the Twenty-First Century. Oxford, Oxford University Press: 99–115.CrossRef Varian, H.R. (2006) “Revealed Preference,” in M. Szenberg, L. Ramrattan and A.A. Gottesman (eds.) Samuelsonian Economics and the Twenty-First Century. Oxford, Oxford University Press: 99–115.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Vermeulen, F. (2012) “Foundations of Revealed Preference: Introduction,” Economic Journal, 122: 287–294.CrossRef Vermeulen, F. (2012) “Foundations of Revealed Preference: Introduction,” Economic Journal, 122: 287–294.CrossRef
Zurück zum Zitat Wong, S. (1973) “The ‘F-Twist’ and the Methodology of Paul Samuelson,” American Economic Review, 63: 312–325. Wong, S. (1973) “The ‘F-Twist’ and the Methodology of Paul Samuelson,” American Economic Review, 63: 312–325.
Zurück zum Zitat Wong, S. (2006) The Foundations of Paul Samuelson’s Revealed Preference Theory: A Study by the Method of Rational Reconstruction. Revised edition. London, Routledge. Originally published in 1978. Wong, S. (2006) The Foundations of Paul Samuelson’s Revealed Preference Theory: A Study by the Method of Rational Reconstruction. Revised edition. London, Routledge. Originally published in 1978.
Metadaten
Titel
Re-examining Samuelson’s Operationalist Methodology
verfasst von
D. Wade Hands
Copyright-Jahr
2019
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-56812-0_3